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

[croadyman]

Yet we were rarely the biggest spenders.

Yeah that is very true

 

[Eboue]

We had a fair advantage

No, you had an advantage that was within the rules at the time. It means those titles are legitimate and well earned but it doesn't make it fair.

 

[Red_Aaron]

The biggest advantage we had was the greatest manager in British football history. Our spending was generally in line with the rest of the PL clubs that were chasing European competition.

 

[Pexbo]

No, you had an advantage that was within the rules at the time. It means those titles are legitimate and well earned but it doesn't make it fair.

Semantics.

As an adverb, fair means “without cheating or trying to achieve unjust advantage” which this qualifies for.

Theres nothing stopping others doing the same as we did over a 20 year period given the same incremental success and exploiting the commercial side.

 

[Chipper]

For the posters saying it would be too complicated to just aware the league titles to the second place teams, how did Serie A handle it when Juventus were relegated? Did Inter etc. not get those titles?

Inter were awarded the title for the season that had just concluded at the time of the investigation (2005/06) which was when all the punishments were handed out. The previous season from where all the wrongdoings were found to have taken place no title was awarded.

All that was controversial too. The newly installed Italian football comissioner appointed 3 judges and only one of them voted to awarded the title to Inter, he ignored them anyway and conviced the footballing decision makers that giving it to Inter would be the right thing to do. He was formerly on Inter's board and had a minority stake in them in the past.

As a bit of a coincedence I was looking at Marseille over the weekend, they were stripped of the title in France for 92/93, paying their opponents to take it easy on them just ahead of the CL final they won. The investigation here was swift, and by September of the following season the title was removed. It was offred to PSG but they actually declined it.

 

[Eboue]

Semantics.

As an adverb, fair means “without cheating or trying to achieve unjust advantage” which this qualifies for.

Theres nothing stopping others doing the same as we did over a 20 year period given the same incremental success and exploiting the commercial side.

Not just semantics. The explosion of money happened at a time when Manchester United was ascendant. If it happened a few years earlier Liverpool would have benefited the most. It's just luck that the timing worked out for the club you support. But any one club having outsized wealth is not fair.

 

[Cloud7]

Inter were awarded the title for the season that had just concluded at the time of the investigation (2005/06) which was when all the punishments were handed out. The previous season from where all the wrongdoings were found to have taken place no title was awarded.


All that was controversial too. The newly installed Italian football comissioner appointed 3 judges and only one of them voted to awarded the title to Inter, he ignored them anyway and he was formerly on Inter's board.

As a bit of a coincedence I was looking at Marseille over the weekend, they were stripped of the title in France for 92/93, paying their opponents to take it easy on them just ahead of the CL final they won. The investigation here was swift, and by September of the following season the title was removed. It was offred to PSG but they actually declined it.

Ahh fair enough. I thought that multiple titles were awarded to the teams that placed second in those seasons, so there was some kind of precedent set. If there is no precedent outside of that one season, then fair enough, it might just be easier and cleaner to award it to no one.

 

[2 man midfield]

For me the annoying thing is it seems to be actively avoided. Every victory and cup is celebrated like nothing is happening.

As a side, in other sports wouldn't teams/athletes be suspended during such an investigation to maintain sporting integrity?

Now this I do get, it irks me when all you see is pundits/media rubbing them over their jeans. But, I think once they’re found guilty all that will change. But for the time being, they have to play dumb for legal reasons.

 

[Pexbo]

Not just semantics. The explosion of money happened at a time when Manchester United was ascendant. If it happened a few years earlier Liverpool would have benefited the most. It's just luck that the timing worked out for the club you support. But any one club having outsized wealth is not fair.

That’s not unfair, we were just the club that took advantage of it through legal means. We didn’t do anything illegal and every other club could have done what we did had they taken the initiative.

Was there an element of luck with the timing? Sure, but I’m not sure how that qualifies as “unfair”.

 

[Lentwood]

I grew up in Wythenshawe, only very recently moved away. I know a handful of blues and their responses are pretty much defiance/denial.

Yeah so I was going to say, if you live in Manchester, then you understand the dynamic at play here...

City were the perennial losers club for perennial losers. The down-and-outs, supporting a club who, like them, had no prospects, no ambition and who never achieved anything. Wallowing in the lower divisions, occasionally spending a year or two scrapping in the lower half of the Premier League...their only two real games of significance in any given season were United (H) and United (A).

The thing is...they had chosen this, they wanted this and they wore it like a badge of honour.

Now presented with an artificially successful side, a global franchise pumped full of Middle Eastern oil money, a club that bears no resemblance to the City of old, they have become everything they always claimed to hate.

So what do their pre-Etihad fans do? The only thing they CAN do really, which is to double-down, bury their heads in the sand and claim the whole World is against them - because their default position in life and in football is to be the underdog.

Of course they know their success is hollow, but I honestly don't think they care.
I think they care more about how they are portrayed, which is why they are so unbelievably sensitive and paranoid. They would hate to be portrayed as cheats who broke all the rules and who have bought their trophies.

They choose to portray themselves as little City, who have done nothing at all wrong and who are fighting the establishment, a corrupt cartel led by United, the traditional top four, the Premier League, the FA, UEFA and FIFA, who are all in cahoots against them.

Defiance is their identity. It's why they chose not to support United, despite growing up in Manchester during an unprecedented era of Red success. It's why they boo the Champions League anthem. It's why they rant on and on on social media and BlueMoon about conspiracies and agendas against them. It's why the ring TalkSports claiming there is a media bias against them.

 

[Eboue]

That’s not unfair, we were just the club that took advantage of it through legal means. We didn’t do anything illegal and every other club could have done what we did had they taken the initiative.

Was there an element of luck with the timing? Sure, but I’m not sure how that qualifies as “unfair”.

Now you're getting into semantics. At its core the game is 11 v 11. It has grown into a whole other thing where certain shirts sell more than others and teams compete on the value of the marketing department. That's fine. It's within the rules and you have to have structure and rules to anything.

But fundamentally one club being able to spend exponentially more than their competitors year after year is not fair. We all recognize it with City. Most non-United fans recognize it with United. It doesn't become more fair because United did it within the structures of the rules. More legitimate and deserving but not more fair.

 

[Pexbo]

Now you're getting into semantics. At its core the game is 11 v 11. It has grown into a whole other thing where certain shirts sell more than others and teams compete on the value of the marketing department. That's fine. It's within the rules and you have to have structure and rules to anything.

But fundamentally one club being able to spend exponentially more than their competitors year after year is not fair. We all recognize it with City. Most non-United fans recognize it with United. It doesn't become more fair because United did it within the structures of the rules. More legitimate and deserving but not more fair.

Yet for net spend we were 3rd in the 90s behind Newcastle and Liverpool and 4th in the 00s behind Chelsea, City(!) and Liverpool.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

Yet we were rarely the biggest spenders.

Blackburn, Newcastle, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man City. All these teams outspent United for the majority of the PL era while SAF was manager. Media narratives really do stick to people like fact even when a quick internet search proves otherwise.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

Yeah so I was going to say, if you live in Manchester, then you understand the dynamic at play here...

City were the perennial losers club for perennial losers. The down-and-outs, supporting a club who, like them, had no prospects, no ambition and who never achieved anything. Wallowing in the lower divisions, occasionally spending a year or two scrapping in the lower half of the Premier League...their only two real games of significance in any given season were United (H) and United (A).

The thing is...they had chosen this, they wanted this and they wore it like a badge of honour.

Now presented with an artificially successful side, a global franchise pumped full of Middle Eastern oil money, a club that bears no resemblance to the City of old, they have become everything they always claimed to hate.

So what do their pre-Etihad fans do? The only thing they CAN do really, which is to double-down, bury their heads in the sand and claim the whole World is against them - because their default position in life and in football is to be the underdog.

Of course they know their success is hollow, but I honestly don't think they care.
I think they care more about how they are portrayed, which is why they are so unbelievably sensitive and paranoid. They would hate to be portrayed as cheats who broke all the rules and who have bought their trophies.

They choose to portray themselves as little City, who have done nothing at all wrong and who are fighting the establishment, a corrupt cartel led by United, the traditional top four, the Premier League, the FA, UEFA and FIFA, who are all in cahoots against them.

Defiance is their identity. It's why they chose not to support United, despite growing up in Manchester during an unprecedented era of Red success. It's why they boo the Champions League anthem. It's why they rant on and on on social media and BlueMoon about conspiracies and agendas against them. It's why the ring TalkSports claiming there is a media bias against them.

All true. They are nuts.

 

[padr81]

Yeah so I was going to say, if you live in Manchester, then you understand the dynamic at play here...

City were the perennial losers club for perennial losers. The down-and-outs, supporting a club who, like them, had no prospects, no ambition and who never achieved anything. Wallowing in the lower divisions, occasionally spending a year or two scrapping in the lower half of the Premier League...their only two real games of significance in any given season were United (H) and United (A).

The thing is...they had chosen this, they wanted this and they wore it like a badge of honour.

Now presented with an artificially successful side, a global franchise pumped full of Middle Eastern oil money, a club that bears no resemblance to the City of old, they have become everything they always claimed to hate.

So what do their pre-Etihad fans do? The only thing they CAN do really, which is to double-down, bury their heads in the sand and claim the whole World is against them - because their default position in life and in football is to be the underdog.

Of course they know their success is hollow, but I honestly don't think they care.
I think they care more about how they are portrayed, which is why they are so unbelievably sensitive and paranoid. They would hate to be portrayed as cheats who broke all the rules and who have bought their trophies.

They choose to portray themselves as little City, who have done nothing at all wrong and who are fighting the establishment, a corrupt cartel led by United, the traditional top four, the Premier League, the FA, UEFA and FIFA, who are all in cahoots against them.

Defiance is their identity. It's why they chose not to support United, despite growing up in Manchester during an unprecedented era of Red success. It's why they boo the Champions League anthem. It's why they rant on and on on social media and BlueMoon about conspiracies and agendas against them. It's why the ring TalkSports claiming there is a media bias against them.

The bolded is an absolutely disgusting comment tarring a large group of people from different backgrounds, ethnicities and social status with the same brush.

It'd be like me saying "All United fans are massive arrogant glory hunters who look down their nose at people despite never achieving anything but living vicariously through a football club.".
If I made such a comment I'd rightly be banned but I wouldn't say that cause I have the intelligence to not tag thousands and thousands of people based on an opinion I pulled straight out of my arse.

 

[Lentwood]

The bolded is an absolutely disgusting comment tarring a large group of people from different backgrounds, ethnicities and social status with the same brush.

It'd be like me saying "All United fans are massive arrogant glory hunters who look down their nose at people despite never achieving anything but living vicariously through a football club.".
If I made such a comment I'd rightly be banned but I wouldn't say that cause I have the intelligence to not tag thousands and thousands of people based on an opinion I pulled straight out of my arse.

"I think they care more about how they are portrayed, which is why they are so unbelievably sensitive"

It's a tongue-in-cheek post on a United forum from someone who lives in Manchester and has many City-supporting colleagues and friends, all of whom often accuse me of being an arrogant glory hunter who looks down his nose at people and who has never achieved anything but who lives vicariously through his football club.

I'm not sure you're in the right place if you're looking for people who say nice things about Manchester City and their supporters...

 

[awop]

"I think they care more about how they are portrayed, which is why they are so unbelievably sensitive"

It's a tongue-in-cheek post on a United forum from someone who lives in Manchester and has many City-supporting colleagues and friends, all of whom often accuse me of being an arrogant glory hunter who looks down his nose at people and who has never achieved anything but who lives vicariously through his football club.

I'm not sure you're in the right place if you're looking for people who say nice things about Manchester City and their supporters...

Quite a lot of venom for a tongue in cheek comment

 

[Berbaclass]

 

[giggs-beckham]

The equivalent of getting off a great rollercoaster and realising you were in a simulator the whole time.

That's good

 

[giggs-beckham]

Is there any right of appeal for City once verdict is determined

 

[Ladron de redcafe]

Quite a lot of venom for a tongue in cheek comment

Yeah I agree with you and Padr. This is silly. I don't understand why sports fans regularly spout vituperative blanket statements about fanbases of opposition teams. It's never seemed logical and certainly isn't appropriate.

 

[2 man midfield]

Yet for net spend we were 3rd in the 90s behind Newcastle and Liverpool and 4th in the 00s behind Chelsea, City(!) and Liverpool.

I think even lower than that. I’ve seen some sources put us behind Arsenal, Villa, Middlesbrough and Blackburn as well as those you mentioned.

 

[Berbaclass]

Is there any right of appeal for City once verdict is determined

I was under the impression’s that they were unable to appeal the PL decision but apparently not.

 

[Matt Varnish]

We al know deep down this will be just a show trial, there will be no real outcome, a slap on the wrist, and a few points deducted.
The issue is the EPL need Man City, more than it needs clubs like Everton and Notts Forest

 

[Tincanalley]

We al know deep down this will be just a show trial, there will be no real outcome, a slap on the wrist, and a few points deducted.
The issue is the EPL need Man City, more than it needs clubs like Everton and Notts Forest

You know ANYTHING about show trials?

 

[T00lsh3d]

Yeah I agree with you and Padr. This is silly. I don't understand why sports fans regularly spout vituperative blanket statements about fanbases of opposition teams. It's never seemed logical and certainly isn't appropriate.

We can still call the scousers drama queens and gobshites right?
Please tell me that hadn’t gone as well?

 

[Matt Varnish]

You know ANYTHING about show trials?

I don't need to.
If anything was going to happen, it would have by now.
It will be like a government inquiry, last months and have no real outcome.

 

[DarkLord1984]

We al know deep down this will be just a show trial, there will be no real outcome, a slap on the wrist, and a few points deducted.
The issue is the EPL need Man City, more than it needs clubs like Everton and Notts Forest

No, they don't need Man City. Why would they? They've gone from a nothing club to a powerhouse in less than 2 decades. The PL coped fine without City in the years that they were yoyoing around mid-table.

Their cheating has turned the PL into a one horse race. If anything it'd be better for the brand if they got rid of them.

 

[DarkLord1984]

for the time being, they have to play dumb for legal reasons.

This makes sense. It's been the elephant in the room for years now and everyone just curiously ignores it. Perhaps once the guilty verdict is reached, people will start talking about it a lot more.

 

[Matt Varnish]

No, they don't need Man City. Why would they? They've gone from a nothing club to a powerhouse in less than 2 decades. The PL coped fine without City in the years that they were yoyoing around mid-table.

Their cheating has turned the PL into a one horse race. If anything it'd be better for the brand if they got rid of them.

How to contradict yourself in less than a sentence.

 

[giggs-beckham]

I was under the impression’s that they were unable to appeal the PL decision but apparently not.

I thought they couldn't appeal to CAS?

 

[Matt Varnish]

I thought they couldn't appeal to CAS?

This was my understanding as well.
Whatever is decided happens.

 

[DarkLord1984]

How to contradict yourself in less than a sentence.

They've only become a powerhouse through blatant cheating. The clubs that the PL truly needs are the historical big clubs e.g. United, Liverpool, Arsenal.

I doubt anyone would bat an eyelid if City were removed from the league at this point in time. All of the clubs who have supposedly written to the PL to complain about City's cheating would rejoice.

 

[RedRocket9908]

Is there any right of appeal for City once verdict is determined

They get 1 appeal, if they are found guilty and appeal the chairman of the independent panel will dismiss the panel then select a new panel who will review the case a decide on the appeal with their decision being final.

 

[RedRocket9908]

We al know deep down this will be just a show trial, there will be no real outcome, a slap on the wrist, and a few points deducted.
The issue is the EPL need Man City, more than it needs clubs like Everton and Notts Forest

The Premier League doesnt need City it would be perfectly fine without them and what the Premier League needs or doesnt need is irrelevant anyway as the outcome of the hearing and the punishment if any is decided by a panel that is completely independent from the Premier League.

 

[Posh Red]

Not just semantics. The explosion of money happened at a time when Manchester United was ascendant. If it happened a few years earlier Liverpool would have benefited the most. It's just luck that the timing worked out for the club you support. But any one club having outsized wealth is not fair.

This is a very silly argument. There’s a huge difference between taking advantage of an opportunity via your own prowess, and cheating via methods unavailable to all of your competitors. It would be akin to devaluing the success of Spanish clubs in Europe because they have an advantage when it comes to assimilating south American players into their teams. United competed on a level playing field to their competitors. They backed a manager that had actually struggled for a few years in his job, and they could have sacked him based on his results in his early years. They allowed him to sell off lots of their big players, and promote a raft of academy players to the first team. The fact that this method paid off should not be used as an argument to downplay their subsequent success.

 

[Moriarty]

No getting away from them. Guardiola was even part of a clue in the Guardian's cryptic crossword today. Easy clue though.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

The Premier League doesnt need City it would be perfectly fine without them and what the Premier League needs or doesnt need is irrelevant anyway as the outcome of the hearing and the punishment if any is decided by a panel that is completely independent from the Premier League.

Who decides who is on the panel?

 

[Eboue]

This is a very silly argument. There’s a huge difference between taking advantage of an opportunity via your own prowess, and cheating via methods unavailable to all of your competitors. It would be akin to devaluing the success of Spanish clubs in Europe because they have an advantage when it comes to assimilating south American players into their teams. United competed on a level playing field to their competitors. They backed a manager that had actually struggled for a few years in his job, and they could have sacked him based on his results in his early years. They allowed him to sell off lots of their big players, and promote a raft of academy players to the first team. The fact that this method paid off should not be used as an argument to downplay their subsequent success.

You're getting defensive instead of responding to my actual point. There's no downplaying the success. When it really comes down to it though, it doesn't matter to West Brom or Southampton what precise financial instruments were used when they have to sell their players. The reality is both clubs have massive financial advantages and it isn't remotely a fair playing field.

 

[Fluctuation0161]

You're getting defensive instead of responding to my actual point. There's no downplaying the success. When it really comes down to it though, it doesn't matter to West Brom or Southampton what precise financial instruments were used when they have to sell their players. The reality is both clubs have massive financial advantages and it isn't remotely a fair playing field.

Sport is quite simple. Clubs agree the rules to abide by, then play the sport. Don't sign up to rules if you have no intention of following them.

There is no chance of West Brom or Southampton catching up with City of they are allowed to continue breaking the rules of the sport (allegedly).