City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th September 2024

[Mockney]

I’ll repeat this, because it always bares repeating.

Fergie won 4 League Cups in his entire career, with teams like Birmingham. Swansea, Middlesborough, Blackburn, Leicester and Spurs winning it between the turn of the century and City’s rise.

City have won 6 of the last 9. It’s obviously nonsense to say it’s the same kind of “domination”… City have bought a whole supplementary team to basically just play in that competition & games like it.

Football needs mandatory squad limitations, or something equally as drastic if state owned clubs are to become the new normal.

 

[Greyfog]

Pretty obvious to me that the dominance is due to Pep just like SAF and when he goes City will be back to winning 1 in 2 or 3. If you guys had competent people upstairs you would have won 1 in 2 or 3 since SAF left. I don't think there is any coach out there other than Klopp that can do back to backs or 3 peats.

 

[OldSchoolManc]

Pretty obvious to me that the dominance is due to Pep just like SAF and when he goes City will be back to winning 1 in 2 or 3. If you guys had competent people upstairs you would have won 1 in 2 or 3 since SAF left. I don't think there is any coach out there other than Klopp that can do back to backs or 3 peats.

No, no, no. And once again no.
It’s Pep + financial doping beyond anything ever seen + off the books payments to entice the top people + other unreported/undiscovered stuff like drugs to combat injuries.

There is no comparison whatsoever in English football. Maybe PSG, but they have no notable competition there

 

[Josep Dowling]

Seriously…I’ve not met one

Normally you get ‘we had to do it otherwise the status quo of clubs never changes’ argument when in reality they could have built up slowly and still become a successful club.

 

[Flying high]

Pretty obvious to me that the dominance is due to Pep just like SAF and when he goes City will be back to winning 1 in 2 or 3. If you guys had competent people upstairs you would have won 1 in 2 or 3 since SAF left. I don't think there is any coach out there other than Klopp that can do back to backs or 3 peats.

This is hugely disrespectful toward SAF and what he achieved.

The convicted drug cheat is running a club which has systematically broken the rules for the last 10+ years.

Yeah, just like fergie.

 

[Sparky Rhiwabon]

Wasn’t Lance Armstrong suspended pending investigation once he was charged? Why isn’t this the case here?

 

[Pexbo]

I’ve said it numerous times but the dereliction of duty from the media who are so invested in the domestic football product is what hurts the most.

Sky, BT, ITV and the BBC all have various packages that they have spent millions to billions on in the EPL, FA Cup, League Cup and European football. As such they are so desperate to protect their investment that it’s become a footnote and not even a “however…”.

Any impartial, independent media source should be transparent with their viewers and appropriately contextualise every one of their victories otherwise it’s a complete disservice to all of City’s competitors.

 

[Zen86]

I’ll repeat this, because it always bares repeating.

Fergie won 4 League Cups in his entire career, with teams like Birmingham. Swansea, Middlesborough, Blackburn, Leicester and Spurs winning it between the turn of the century and City’s rise.

City have won 6 of the last 9. It’s obviously nonsense to say it’s the same kind of “domination”… City have bought a whole supplementary team to basically just play in that competition & games like it.

Football needs mandatory squad limitations, or something equally as drastic if state owned clubs are to become the new normal.

It’s incredible how people ignore City’s league cup haul. It’s quite a laughable statistic and rather telling of how broken the game is now.

 

[The Irish Connection]

That documentary is a very good watch!

 

[JagUTD]

I’ve said it numerous times but the dereliction of duty from the media who are so invested in the domestic football product is what hurts the most.

Sky, BT, ITV and the BBC all have various packages that they have spent millions to billions on in the EPL, FA Cup, League Cup and European football. As such they are so desperate to protect their investment that it’s become a footnote and not even a “however…”.

Any impartial, independent media source should be transparent with their viewers and appropriately contextualise every one of their victories otherwise it’s a complete disservice to all of City’s competitors.

I've no doubt that City will have made sure the media know that if they make to much noise about City cheating, their lawyers will be in touch.

That said, the media still have a responsibility to report on these things but given the stories about City winning and dining journalists in the early days of the takeover while threatening to blacklist any that didn't report on them in a positive light, it wouldn't be a surprise if they were cautious.

 

[caid]

To be honest i wouldn't expect journalistic integrity to be hugely significant to the likes of Shearer, Jenas or Neville. Not really trying to be critical, just feels realistic. Any sports journalist who I actually have some regard for commented on it, if not centred their entire article on it.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

That documentary is a very good watch!

Which one?

 

[Berbaclass]

Which one?

 

[Judas]

Pretty obvious to me that the dominance is due to Pep just like SAF and when he goes City will be back to winning 1 in 2 or 3. If you guys had competent people upstairs you would have won 1 in 2 or 3 since SAF left. I don't think there is any coach out there other than Klopp that can do back to backs or 3 peats.

Has Klopp had three strong seasons in a row at Liverpool? Genuine question, because I can't remember. I know they've had back to back good ones.

 

[Greyfog]

Has Klopp had three strong seasons in a row at Liverpool? Genuine question, because I can't remember. I know they've had back to back good ones.

If he had Pep money, he too can afford 2 world class players in every position.

 

[Cloud7]

I’ll repeat this, because it always bares repeating.

Fergie won 4 League Cups in his entire career, with teams like Birmingham. Swansea, Middlesborough, Blackburn, Leicester and Spurs winning it between the turn of the century and City’s rise.

City have won 6 of the last 9. It’s obviously nonsense to say it’s the same kind of “domination”… City have bought a whole supplementary team to basically just play in that competition & games like it.

Football needs mandatory squad limitations, or something equally as drastic if state owned clubs are to become the new normal.

Fully agree with this.

What we need is

A) A hard limit on transfers in and out per season. This includes signings and loans.

B) A hard limit on the amount of senior players that can be registered in a squad. And I mean something like 20-22. Enough for your first team, subs bench and a few reserves. If you have an injury crisis, then dip into your youth academy. That's what they're there for.

 

[Real Name]

But we did the same in the 90s/00s.

We cheated in the 90s and 00s?

 

[Real Name]

There’s a perception that City fans deny ownership investment along the way to get us to where we have today. I don’t think that’s the case. We just don’t care about FFP because the intent of it was to stop teams like City winning big trophies. If anything it just makes it all the more sweet.

This cracks me up.

 

[erikcred]

Has Klopp had three strong seasons in a row at Liverpool? Genuine question, because I can't remember. I know they've had back to back good ones.

I'd have to grudgingly concede that a CL final followed by a 97 points season and a CL, which was then followed by a 98 points season and the title counts as three strong seasons in a row.

 

[Judas]

I'd have to grudgingly concede that a CL final followed by a 97 points season and a CL, which was then followed by a 98 points season and the title counts as three strong seasons in a row.

Yep, fair enough!

 

[Rooney in Paris]

But we did the same in the 90s/00s.

We didn't.

 

[Herschel Krustofsky]

Thanks for that

 

[Gums]

UEFA will look back at this case as their failed opportunity to take a stance, make a difference, and retain control. In a few years, when Saudia Arabia signs European/Global top clubs to join their Super League, they will regret their spineless efforts, and it'll be too late. UEFA's greed and fear will have led to their downfall. The FA absolutely must swing the full force of the hammer. Their ruling will have a massive impact on all of European football, not just the PL. But even if they rule in favour of football, I still don't see any measures in place to prevent any other state-owned club from trying to get around rules and regulations. I can't see what is supposed to stop the next City from happening. Footy is doomed.

 

[Oranges038]

Not true. United developed youth and spent less than the likes of Liverpool and Blackburn in the 90s.

Do some research.

And still had to balance the books at one point by selling Jaap Stam.

 

[11101]

I’ve said it numerous times but the dereliction of duty from the media who are so invested in the domestic football product is what hurts the most.

Sky, BT, ITV and the BBC all have various packages that they have spent millions to billions on in the EPL, FA Cup, League Cup and European football. As such they are so desperate to protect their investment that it’s become a footnote and not even a “however…”.

Any impartial, independent media source should be transparent with their viewers and appropriately contextualise every one of their victories otherwise it’s a complete disservice to all of City’s competitors.

It's also been said numerous times that they're not going to go too hard on City until the case is resolved because they know there is an army of lawyers waiting to go after anybody who accuses them of anything. They've been incredibly aggressive in trying to shut down anything against them, it's so important that the league doesn't bottle the case because once it's over i expect all the journos who have been forced to keep quiet will turn on them.

 

[Pexbo]

It's also been said numerous times that they're not going to go too hard on City until the case is resolved because they know there is an army of lawyers waiting to go after anybody who accuses them of anything. They've been incredibly aggressive in trying to shut down anything against them, it's so important that the league doesn't bottle the case because once it's over i expect all the journos who have been forced to keep quiet will turn on them.

They don’t need to accuse them of anything. They’ve been charged with these offences, until they are proven it’s perfectly within the media’s rights to discuss them as “allegations” and it’s an editorial decision to choose not to rather than a legal decision.

 

[Salford_Red83]

That's exactly why it's idiotic from a neutral position. FFP would have ensured the title stayed between United and Arsenal. You dumb weapon.

This is a bit rude

 

[MrMarcello]

And still had to balance the books at one point by selling Jaap Stam.

I find that was more SAF finding excuse/reason in selling his best defender. The club hadn't spent much in the previous two summer windows, 1999 and 2000, so the funds where there for a bigger spree in 2001.

 

[11101]

They don’t need to accuse them of anything. They’ve been charged with these offences, until they are proven it’s perfectly within the media’s rights to discuss them as “allegations” and it’s an editorial decision to choose not to rather than a legal decision.

Just the threat is enough, that's the weapon they have used to close down other discussion against them. Its a common tactic in big business.

 

[SER19]

That's a hard watch. They truly have ruined the sport and it's not or never if the game is to ever have a degree of integrity again.

 

[Oranges038]

I find that was more SAF finding excuse/reason in selling his best defender. The club hadn't spent much in the previous two summer windows, 1999 and 2000, so the funds where there for a bigger spree in 2001.

They'd just spent 80m on RVN, Forlan and Veron.

The book stuff was just a smokescreen, they had to sell to balance the books. He was the one that went.

 

[MrMarcello]

They'd just spent 80m on RVN, Forlan and Veron.

The book stuff was just a smokescreen, they had to sell to balance the books. He was the one that went.

They had spent 50m in 2001 funds - 28m on Veron, 19m on Ruud, 2.5m on Carroll, and 500k on Richardson. Forlan was bought for 7.5m in January 2002 after selling Cole for 8m. They had plenty of funds to spend. SAF was pissed off over the tapping up allegations and dropped Stam after the horror showing (Gary was worse that day) against Fulham. Believe what you want to believe, maybe both talking points apply.

They spent 10.5m total in 1999 and 7.9m in 2000 without considering transfers out that brought in some funds. They had plenty of funds to spend in 2001 without needing to balance books. Ruud was practically signed in early 2000 if not for the knee injury, his transfer was basically 2000 funds that were not used.

 

[Oranges038]

They had spent 50m in 2001 funds - 28m on Veron, 19m on Ruud, 2.5m on Carroll, and 500k on Richardson. Forlan was bought for 7.5m in January 2002 after selling Cole for 8m. They had plenty of funds to spend. SAF was pissed off over the tapping up allegations and dropped Stam after the horror showing (Gary was worse that day) against Fulham. Believe what you want to believe, maybe both talking points apply.

They spent 10.5m total in 1999 and 7.9m in 2000 without considering transfers out that brought in some funds. They had plenty of funds to spend in 2001 without needing to balance books. Ruud was practically signed in early 2000 if not for the knee injury, his transfer was basically 2000 funds that were not used.

I know there were few signings, the reality was that during that period Utd didn't need to sign players, because the squad was relatively strong in every department with every player at the peak of their powers.

Stam had also just come back off an achilles injury, there were concerns about his longevity as well. So Utd need to sell someone that will get a good fee.

Now, according to Stam, the main reason he was sold was to balance the books.

https://m.independent.ie/sport/socc...meone-it-was-not-about-the-book/35348396.html

 

[Fluctuation0161]

That's exactly why it's idiotic from a neutral position. FFP would have ensured the title stayed between United and Arsenal. You dumb weapon.

It really wouldn't. How do you explain Liverpools recent title?

 

[MrMarcello]

I know there were few signings, the reality was that during that period Utd didn't need to sign players, because the squad was relatively strong in every department with every player at the peak of their powers.

Stam had also just come back off an achilles injury, there were concerns about his longevity as well. So Utd need to sell someone that will get a good fee.

Now, according to Stam, the main reason he was sold was to balance the books.

https://m.independent.ie/sport/socc...meone-it-was-not-about-the-book/35348396.html

Sounds like spin but perhaps in the business side of the sport clubs must shuffle high salary players around at times, except for the state-backed clubs of course. The wage structure had been busted around 2000 and the likes of Ruud and Veron arrived on high salaries. The club was forced to spend 30m on Rio in 2002 to fill the void left by Stam. Getting a large fee for player that had recently returned from a bad injury was certainly good business, per say, but selling your best defender was crazy. Maybe it was difficult for SAF and the club to admit they received an offer they could not refuse, at the time when the season just started.

It is curious exactly what "balancing the books" was necessary considered the constant post-tax profit the club was turning in the multi-millions per year. Maybe it was increased dividends to be paid out to investors thus a need to balance the books. It certainly was not to reduce player wages as Blanc arrived on the same wage, possibly higher than Stam, and a hefty signing bonus from what I recall being reported (or rumored). Rio later arrived on a high wages as well.

Appears Stam's transfer fee did not affect the books until 2002 year-end reporting and for only a fraction of the 16.5m fee agreed, seems about 4.5m initially paid. https://www.worldsoccer.com/world-s...-take-legal-action-to-recover-stam-cash-52768

http://catarina.udlap.mx/u_dl_a/tales/documentos/lcp/garcia_v_j/apendiceE.pdf
Year ------------------------------------- 2002 ---- 2001 ----- 2000 ----- 1999 ----- 1998
Taxation ----------------------------- (7,308) -- (7,399) -- (4,838) -- (7,023) -- (8,211)
Profit for the year ----------------25,039 -- 14,379 -- 11,950 -- 15,388 --- 19,628
Dividends --------------------------- (8,053) -- (5,195) -- (4,936) -- (4,676) -- (4,416)
Retained profit for the year - 16,986 -- 9,184 ---- 7,014 ---- 10,712 --- 15,212

 

[Orion.]

Pretty obvious to me that the dominance is due to Pep just like SAF and when he goes City will be back to winning 1 in 2 or 3. If you guys had competent people upstairs you would have won 1 in 2 or 3 since SAF left. I don't think there is any coach out there other than Klopp that can do back to backs or 3 peats.

Nonsense - P£p’s only stayed at City for so long because he was paranoid that had he left earlier, the next guy would have also won just as much and likely done more in the Champions League with that squad, and put his ‘genius’ into context.

It’s the club that should have dominated English football for the past 6 years, by default. There’s no other team who should have finished above them domestically in that time; it’s also a better squad than anybody else who’s won the CL in that time too, so P£p is actually underachieving.

 

[Orion.]

It really wouldn't. How do you explain Liverpools recent title?

FFP also facilitated the Leicester title and Spurs annually competing at the top of the table for the first time in decades. If it was imposed properly, it’s observably the best thing to happen to football’s sporting legitimacy in the modern era.

German football went to shit because a mediocre club like City could cherry pick the likes of Sane, De Bruyne, Gundogan and more recently Haaland from Bayern’s rivals. Juventus monopolised Serie A for a decade because P$G stockpiled Ibrahimovic, Thiago Silva, Cavani and Lavezzi from their rivals.

Oil states have no place in football.

 

[GeneralKenobi]

This reminds me a lot of the Barcelona case.
Cheating clubs (one through money and the other through refs) that are slowly killing the game.
Everyone knows they cheated and nobody seems to care. Specially the authorities many of which look more like accomplices than anything else.

 

[Oranges038]

Sounds like spin but perhaps in the business side of the sport clubs must shuffle high salary players around at times, except for the state-backed clubs of course. The wage structure had been busted around 2000 and the likes of Ruud and Veron arrived on high salaries. The club was forced to spend 30m on Rio in 2002 to fill the void left by Stam. Getting a large fee for player that had recently returned from a bad injury was certainly good business, per say, but selling your best defender was crazy. Maybe it was difficult for SAF and the club to admit they received an offer they could not refuse, at the time when the season just started.

It is curious exactly what "balancing the books" was necessary considered the constant post-tax profit the club was turning in the multi-millions per year. Maybe it was increased dividends to be paid out to investors thus a need to balance the books. It certainly was not to reduce player wages as Blanc arrived on the same wage, possibly higher than Stam, and a hefty signing bonus from what I recall being reported (or rumored). Rio later arrived on a high wages as well.

Appears Stam's transfer fee did not affect the books until 2002 year-end reporting and for only a fraction of the 16.5m fee agreed, seems about 4.5m initially paid. https://www.worldsoccer.com/world-s...-take-legal-action-to-recover-stam-cash-52768

http://catarina.udlap.mx/u_dl_a/tales/documentos/lcp/garcia_v_j/apendiceE.pdf
Year ------------------------------------- 2002 ---- 2001 ----- 2000 ----- 1999 ----- 1998
Taxation ----------------------------- (7,308) -- (7,399) -- (4,838) -- (7,023) -- (8,211)
Profit for the year ----------------25,039 -- 14,379 -- 11,950 -- 15,388 --- 19,628
Dividends --------------------------- (8,053) -- (5,195) -- (4,936) -- (4,676) -- (4,416)
Retained profit for the year - 16,986 -- 9,184 ---- 7,014 ---- 10,712 --- 15,212

As far as I know, Utd had just about become debt free at this point in time. But, were still a public company, then you had Magner and McManus buying up shares that would leave them as majority shareholders. As a public company, with transfer fees going up and player wages rising in the background (Keane was on 55/60k a week and had a matching clause for any new players coming in that might get more).

The club couldn't just go spending 80m in a year on players regardless of how successful they were on the pitch. Money had to come in too. Then you had the whole book thing and it was a perfect scenario to sell Stam, a few months later he was done for nandrolone and it looked like a another masterstroke.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

FFP also facilitated the Leicester title and Spurs annually competing at the top of the table for the first time in decades. If it was imposed properly, it’s observably the best thing to happen to football’s sporting legitimacy in the modern era.

I agree with this. How people can argue that FFP is shit, and then look at the club that has breached it the most, City, and believe that is good for football, is just a desire to take a contradictory position.