Coming at this from the perspective of someone who is more a general fan of English football than of any one particular team, this thread is actually extraordinarily pathetic.
Manchester City have put together an incredible squad at a lower cost in transfer fees than Chelsea's and on a lower overall wage bill than both ourselves and Chelsea (and no, Manchester City's transfer fees/wages for this season are not part of the charges brought against them by the Premier League).
In any case, those FFP rules that Manchester City are accused of breaking are despicable in their nature. I will never understand why it should be fair that teams like Manchester United and Real Madrid be legally protected to continuously outspend all their rivals simply through having created more revenue historically, leading to a perpetual cycle of anti-competitive protectionism where the fresh investment required for new competition is throttled.
I also notice a distinct lack of appreciation for what Manchester City have given to English football. Since 2009, Manchester City have brought a large volume of star players to the Premier League, contributed some of the league's most defining moments, contributed to England's coefficient in Europe and ultimately been a major reason behind the dramatic increase in television revenues which have benefitted the entire league and wider football pyramid.
I understand that there is also this "sportswashing" angle, but as with the above aspects, I also do not understand it at all - what exactly is the practical point that those who use this argument are trying to make?
Everybody cares about human rights abuses across the world and specifically in this instance, the related issues in the Middle East.
However, if Abu Dhabi hadn't purchased Manchester City, would all the political prisoners being held in the UAE now be free? If England had given the UAE and other Middle Eastern countries the cold shoulder in the past, would their subsequent pivot towards China and Russia have improved the human rights situations there?
Simply holding the position that you don't want such states to be involved in English football, with zero additional thought given to the wider context within which this viewpoint sits, is a completely closed-minded and morally indefensible position to hold. The way these situations improve is through dialogue and communication, through giving Qatar the World Cup then using this to push through the abolition of the kafala system.
It does not improve with stonewalling through the adoption of an us vs them attitude.