I think we all know that first world countries have no corruption, unlike third world countries.
What developed countries have instead of dirty corruption it's "lobbying"
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th September 2024
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
I think we all know that first world countries have no corruption, unlike third world countries.
What developed countries have instead of dirty corruption it's "lobbying"
You should jog on
That is true.
As a non-religious man, it's what I...believe in (I suppose). That is, I refuse to not hope. It's what keeps me in the game: logically, I will probably lose that game in all sorts of ways - but I still...hope, and nobody can take that away from me.
It is a lot of corruption in the UK, when it benefits all parties involved and the benefit outweights the risks. How and why would you do it here as the selling club?
Not saying it’s happening or it’s not happening. I just found the reason you gave a little funny. What you mentioned is a small obstacle, but hardly something insurmountable.
Say you're Leeds. Officially you've sold Kalvin Phillips for 50m, but the actual amount is 60. How do you disguise the income? Remember that doing this also gives you less room to maneuver due to FFP, so it's something you don't want.
Radrizzani’s Eleven Sports getting a contract to broadcast the Saudis / Abu Dhabi’s league or whatever, say 10% to 20% above market rate?
Thanks for the reply, and what about FFP. How could they have 34 players on the books at the moment and be within those rules?
Murray Rosen KC will appoint 3 independant people to make up the panel who will then listen to the case from the Premier League and the defence from City then after that will declare City guilty or not guilty and recommend a punishment if required.
If either the FA or City are unhappy with the outcome they can appeal it at which point Murray Rosen KC will appointment a completely new independant 3 man panel who will follow the same process as the previous panel except this time the outcome they decide on with be final with no further appeals possible.
I guess it depends how much the owner cares about the club vs their back pocket also? For some they're not going to complain about the 10m ending up going around the club to them.
Haven't seen it posted yet but The Overlap uploaded the part 1 of their new episode about City and FFP:
City fan reverting to the good old "i'm not an accountant i only care about football" bs argument to avoid answering questions...
On a side note, their new studio looks great but their sound engineer needs to find a new job. Horrible mixing and levels, you can barely hear some journalists/fans before Carragher explode in your ear.
Can't stand that idiot
True. Fair enough. I think I misunderstood your first post, apologies.
Not strictly true. We spent nearly 1.4 billion trying to chase them over the last decade or so. They inflated player prices. To the point where now we are having to get "Burnley" players on loan because we can't buy a top quality player.
Agree re: Erik but we need some investment and it isn't forthcoming.
This is even more nonsensical the your other post. They bought the players they could buy because the cheated, lied about it and tried to cover it up.
Yes, let all clubs cheat because it "raises the bar"!
So the goal of the corruption is to personally enrich one of the two owners, with no benefit to Leeds?
Then either everyone else involved in the deal has to go along with it even though it damages them and the club, or there has two be two negotiations going on. One that is just for show, for everyone at the club, and then a separate one with York and Radrizzani who presumably have to order the money people at Leeds to accept the fake below value deal.
Versus just getting another sponsor, how does this make any sense? One whistleblower and you're done, and the people you're trying to bribe are your competitors.
I've been following the discussion when I can but has anyone done the time honoured thing and edited the Wiki pages for the clubs involved? Removed Cities trophies, updated United and others.
While petty such actions tend to make it onto the prestigious football media pages of Sport Bible and the ironic Football Funnies, followed about 4 months later by the Daily Star. The pinnacle of any footballing rascals escapades.
It might also add another leaf to the great City conspiracy, sparking lively debate across 4-500 pages on Bluemoon, from which great entertainment can be expected.
On a serious note, claims of this taking years to conclude seem to be wishful thinking, the damage done to both the league and to City regardless of the outcome will be immense. It's in everyone's interest to get this sorted as soon as possible. Well, it would be if City genuinely have nothing to hide...
While petty such actions tend to make it onto the prestigious football media pages of Sport Bible and the ironic Football Funnies, followed about 4 months later by the Daily Star. The pinnacle of any footballing rascals escapades.
It might also add another leaf to the great City conspiracy, sparking lively debate across 4-500 pages on Bluemoon, from which great entertainment can be expected.
On a serious note, claims of this taking years to conclude seem to be wishful thinking, the damage done to both the league and to City regardless of the outcome will be immense. It's in everyone's interest to get this sorted as soon as possible. Well, it would be if City genuinely have nothing to hide...
Last edited:
What Chelsea are currently doing is fine with FFP. They 'can' (emphasis needed here) afford it by essentially spending tomorrow's income today. The problem they have however, is that they are putting themselves down a cul-de-sac in terms of their spending going forward.
For instance, I believe they do not have much of a budget for the Summer if they don't qualify for the CL or raise significant revenues from new sponsorships. This is looking like in regard to the CL.
As for sponsorships, this City situation has obviously put a massive magnifying glass on any sort of income, therefore they are going to have to make sure that is 100% legit.
From my brief reading around, it appears Chelsea do have slightly lower sponsorship revenue than would be expected of a club of their size and recent success, so I think it is plausible they will raise this to a degree, especially as they haven't got as many partners. However, even if they do increase this, I don't expect it will be to such a degree that will allow them to go as bonkers has they have done for the last two windows. Unless of course they can sell a lot of their deadwood, which is also unlikely.
At these levels, everything is doable… say, Team A offers 50m and Team B offers 40m + one youngster to be bought above market rate in the next 12-24 months + sign in fee for the player or a job for his brother… I mean, it is all legit, even if one might call that corruption. The greatest part of corporate finance is to make you pay the least achievable amount of tax, so any vehicle to differ / dilute / mask / defer income is used, at all levels.
Brown envelopes or piles of cash the likes Belgian police found at the premises of a few MEPs last month are just for the plebs or the idiots. Gatekeepers of any sort are the main target of “lobbying”, especially where big monies are at stake.
I'm all for this
None of those methods do the required thing here, if they underpay on one player with the promise to overpay on another player later, that still requires City to register the total fee and be FFP compliant. If shifts things around, similarly to the swap deals you as a Juve fan are very familiar with, but it doesn't allow City to spend more than reported.
Last edited:
Yes, you'd think so.
My guess is that how soon this is sorted depends almost entirely on City.
If they bend over and take their punishment, it will be sorted quickly (relatively speaking, it could still take months) - and I predict the "punishment" will be less than satisfying (for most). *
On the other hand, if they do not bend over - it could take a long time. As far as I understand it, it will be possible for both parties (City and the PL) to challenge the verdict of the commission - and it seems pretty much inevitable that this will happen, regardless of the outcome (unless the whole thing is just for show, that is).
* City have about 25 actual fans in the traditional sense, and most of those people will hate it ("we've done nothing wrong, it was Whisky Face all along, it's a cabbal, I mean caball, I mean...something"). They should celebrate their undeserved good fortune, but they won't - but, again, most of us will feel cheated (because City will be let off with a slap on the wrist, figuratively speaking).
Harsh on @esmufc07
Possibilities are endless, though, with these sort of financial conglomerates, and all perfectly legit: if the goal is to undercook the accounting balance of one vehicle to stay within the limits for that vehicle, you might put the rest on different vehicles. I mean, the “fair” value of any asset or the “market rate” for players does not exist: both parts just reach the most favorable agreement for their own accounting sheets and deal done.
That’s why it is in noone interest to go the ordinary justice route and drag these matters for years: in many cases, there is no legal framework to mount a solid case, so any random sanction administered by the PL on City and disrupting their business will be challenged and possibly dismounted by the ordinary courts, that opening to liabilities in the order of billions.
Well that’s not entirely true, an appeal only looks at the legality of the evidence used against them to verify or question whether they have grounds to charge based on said evidence. It’s not a complete retrial.
The FPF has a big problem: it is illegal. You can't forbid a property from spending its money on its company. The FPF serves to crystallize the positions of strength and prevent small teams from becoming big. If City is sanctioned and appeals to the court, FPF will be canceled (and probably PL will have to repay City with hundreds of millions).
Utd fans should be pretty happy. City blocked Liverpool's golden era and are now going to be almost certainly relegated at least 1 division for the privilege. You weren't stopping Liverpool yourselves post Fergie
As for Chelsea, the risk is more financial difficulties, getting stuck with players on contracts Winston Bogarde style and not winning like we did under Roman.
As for Chelsea, the risk is more financial difficulties, getting stuck with players on contracts Winston Bogarde style and not winning like we did under Roman.
If they get relgated and put in their box then I guess it is fair to say they weren't the hero's we wanted, but the hero's we needed.
By not actually having 34 players on the books? As far as current first team players are concerned at least.
I'm counting 29 players in the Chelsea squad who I'd classify as first team players, as well as a handful of youth players who will no doubt be on low wages for the time being (Slonina, Hall, Hutchinson, Santos, D. Fofana). A good chunk of the first teamers (6 in total) are academy grown players and most of them, aside from Reece James, are on very reasonable salaries and no side costs from fee amortisations.
Either way it's true we currently have too many players and will need to trim down the squad in the summer. The club are definitely not planning to go into next season with a squad this big and I very much doubt that having a handful too many players for six months will make us fail FFP for the ongoing season. Next season is another question as it's looking likely we'll miss out on CL but it certainly won't be due to having too many players in the squad because there will be a lot of departures.
Most of the players we're looking to get rid off will have just 1-2 years left on their contracts and thus shouldn't be too difficult to shift on with a full summer transfer window to look forward to. I'm sure the players on the chopping block (Pulisic, Ziyech, Auba etc.) already know their fate and will already be sounding out interest from other clubs through their agents.
How the feck's it illegal? Nobody's forcing any club to take part in the EPL but the ones who want to play in it will have to abide by an agreed upon set of rules.
City are free to create their own league and invest as much money on the company as they want but as long as they play in the EPL they need to follow the rules as per the contract they have signed with the EPL.
Last edited:
There is no way you wear Manchester red and just posted this.
So are you saying that a cabal of big clubs got together and dreamed up FFP, forced UEFA, the Premier League and every other club in Europe to agree to adopt it?
@NotThatSoph @Bepi
Not going to comment on your dispute regarding hypothetical breaches, but will lend you what's below for general orientation.
"Wenn wir Probleme haben in der Familie, dann lösen wir die Probleme in der Familie und gehen nicht zu einer fremden Familie. Alles, was im Fußball passiert, und alle Schwierigkeiten, die im Fußball sind, sollen innerhalb der fußballerischen Gerichtsbarkeit oder Rechtsprechung gelöst werden und nicht vor ordentliche Gerichte gebracht werden.
Das ist nicht mehr unsere Familie."
— Joseph Blatter
(= When we are having problems in the family, then we solve the problems within the family and don't go to another family. Everything that's happening in football, and all difficulties that there are in football, should be solved within the footballing judiciary and jurisprudence and not brought before ordinary courts.
That's not our family anymore.)
Quoted verbatim, source
Not going to comment on your dispute regarding hypothetical breaches, but will lend you what's below for general orientation.
"Wenn wir Probleme haben in der Familie, dann lösen wir die Probleme in der Familie und gehen nicht zu einer fremden Familie. Alles, was im Fußball passiert, und alle Schwierigkeiten, die im Fußball sind, sollen innerhalb der fußballerischen Gerichtsbarkeit oder Rechtsprechung gelöst werden und nicht vor ordentliche Gerichte gebracht werden.
Das ist nicht mehr unsere Familie."
— Joseph Blatter
(= When we are having problems in the family, then we solve the problems within the family and don't go to another family. Everything that's happening in football, and all difficulties that there are in football, should be solved within the footballing judiciary and jurisprudence and not brought before ordinary courts.
That's not our family anymore.)
Quoted verbatim, source
It's not illegal at all. Sports league are private entities and to compete in them, clubs have to abide by their rules. What you're saying simply doesn't apply.
In other sports, for instance, the NFL, there is a salary cap. No team is allowed to just spend their money as much as they want. It's not illegal, it's part of the rules that clubs must follow to gain the benefits of competing in the league.
There is zero chance City can sue and have the PL repay them. That take is simply not understanding how entities like sports leagues operate.
What people seem to ignore in these cases is that there are 19 other clubs in the premier League that, as far as we know, DID abide by the rules. It's them and their grievances that is the issue here insofar as the premier league are concerned. Why the feck should one team be allowed to get away with doing what the other 19 didn't, simply because they keep paying people off to ignore them? What happens when, eventually, those 19 clubs have had enough of accepting aforementioned breaking of the rules which (again) we assume they played by?
There's potential lawsuits from the OTHER side should city by found guilty here. Loss of earnings etc etc.
There's potential lawsuits from the OTHER side should city by found guilty here. Loss of earnings etc etc.
I would be amazed to see the the Emirates, a non democratic, non liberal, non westerner entity, follow the “rule of family” of Sepp fecking Blatter and let their sportwashing project crumble under ignominy and shame.
Brilliant. First off, this is not mostly about FFP. It's about fraud. The Premiership is a club. It makes the rules. You sign up to them. You don't have to join. But if you do, you re-sign every year. Now go suck on that, and tell the 'property' with the hand up your back they can go suck on it too.
Am I the only one think that this will not go anywhere. City will get a slap in the wrist at the end of the day.
The FA/PL is putting up a show that they're actually doing something. There were too many complaints from the public that City is blatantly cheating. Hence, they need to create an impression that they're "doing something".
With City's lawyers and toothless FA/PL, guess who will be the winner?
The FA/PL is putting up a show that they're actually doing something. There were too many complaints from the public that City is blatantly cheating. Hence, they need to create an impression that they're "doing something".
With City's lawyers and toothless FA/PL, guess who will be the winner?
Last edited:
What’s even funnier is he copy and pasted the exact same post he made in this thread on Monday
Neville is a tw@
MOS in June 2021 said:
I've understood that as an implicit threat to take matters to an ordinary court in order to challenge the currenty uncontested lawfulness of parts of the FA handbook. A case in precedence.
Can someone with legal background shed some light on this (see bolded bit of quote): Can owners of a club challenge the FA's rules' lawfulness in the first place? (And thus make a case against any penalties for breaching 'unlawful rules' whatsoever?)
Mirror in February 2023 said:
Second question for someone with legal background (see bolded bit in quote): Can arbitration nevertheless be had by going to court? (Basically challenging the rulebook's lawfulness from above as well as the installedsports arbitration system in total?)
Looking for a better understanding of things, and with kind regards
Whydah