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

City cannot be found guilty. The repercussions for English football would be too much at this stage.
 
joi_division said:
City cannot be found guilty. The repercussions for English football would be too much at this stage.
Click to expand...
What’s worse than the simulation we are living in now? English football doesn’t want this, I don’t know why purging the cheating is seen as a bad thing
 
joi_division said:
City cannot be found guilty. The repercussions for English football would be too much at this stage.
Click to expand...
It depends on the evidence the PL has. We have seen City is a pretty efficient operation. Hopefully they slipped up and left serious evidence but I doubt it. They really need to be reigned in, having more commercial revenue than United and Liverpool is a p**** take.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
PSG are 8th and City are 10th: https://sportsbrief.com/football/32449-a-ranked-list-10-selling-soccer-jerseys-world/

To be fair in middle east you would see many more City and PSG shirts than anywhere else.
Click to expand...

In my kids team in Norfolk/Suffolk (the field they play in literally straddles the border), there’s a fair smattering of Ipswich and Norwich shirts. Last time I took him the only ‘big’ team shirts were perhaps one Arsenal and two or three Man City. This is all under 10s though. So the support is there amongst the kids, but I think it’ll take a generation before this really hits home.
 
NicolaSacco said:
In my kids team in Norfolk/Suffolk (the field they play in literally straddles the border), there’s a fair smattering of Ipswich and Norwich shirts. Last time I took him the only ‘big’ team shirts were perhaps one Arsenal and two or three Man City. This is all under 10s though. So the support is there amongst the kids, but I think it’ll take a generation before this really hits home.
Click to expand...
Haaland has cornered the kids market for sure. My neighbour's son in Oxfordshire went from a C Ronaldo shirt to a Haaland shirt. Really can't figure that out.
 
Last edited:
joi_division said:
City cannot be found guilty. The repercussions for English football would be too much at this stage.
Click to expand...

That's how severe tumours work. Ignore it for as long as possible despite numerous doctor's warnings, then when it's 'time to do something about it', just shrug your shoulders and say well that's just how it is. No one could have prevented it.

Ultimately, your quality of life degrades until a slow, painful death.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
Haaland has cornered the kids market for sure. My neighbour in Oxfordshire went from a C Ronaldo shirt to a Haaland shirt. Really can't figure that out.
Click to expand...

I'm also in Oxfordshire and have seen quite a few schoolkids in Man City shirts over the past couple of years, something you obviously wouldn't have seen when I was growing up. It's always literally primary school kids, or up to maximum age 13 though.

City's most well-known YouTube 'pundit' fan who knocks around with Rory Jennings etc seems to have some kind of Bristolian (?) accent

They're definitely spreading but the generational nature of football support in England means it'll take way longer than growing a foreign fanbase does.
 
Wengerista said:
I'm also in Oxfordshire and have seen quite a few schoolkids in Man City shirts over the past couple of years, something you obviously wouldn't have seen when I was growing up. It's always literally primary school kids, or up to maximum age 13 though.

City's most well-known YouTube 'pundit' fan who knocks around with Rory Jennings etc seems to have some kind of Bristolian (?) accent

They're definitely spreading but the generational nature of football support in England means it'll take way longer than growing a foreign fanbase does.
Click to expand...
Buvey, tbh he is really funny and a good WUM
 
I find this argument coming through where people are comparing what United have spent v what City have spent totally bizarre.

we have been shit in the transfer market in recent years. Everyone knows it. But the comparison is utterly irrelevant.

the difference being that we have still spent within the FFP rules (we have just spent very poorly) City quite clearly haven’t.
 
joi_division said:
City cannot be found guilty. The repercussions for English football would be too much at this stage.
Click to expand...
This is what I think too. They will be found guilty of some charges and be given either a fine or a small points deduction but nothing too significant like relegation or retrospective action.
There's no good outcome out of this.
 
Adisa said:
This is what I think too. They will be found guilty of some charges and be given either a fine or a small points deduction but nothing too significant like relegation or retrospective action.
There's no good outcome out of this.
Click to expand...

If (and big if) they are found guilty of significant offenses the PL has to lay the hammer down. Otherwise whatever rules they are found guilty of violating, are deemed useless. Yes, they tarnish their brand in the process but that is what happens when you lie with fleas

The out for the PL is either: City are exonerated, or City while not admitting guilt, comes to a plea deal with the PL to close this chapter and move on.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
PSG are 8th and City are 10th: https://sportsbrief.com/football/32449-a-ranked-list-10-selling-soccer-jerseys-world/

To be fair in middle east you would see many more City and PSG shirts than anywhere else.
Click to expand...

There's zero chance of City getting a hefty punishment when they are owned by a state that's a key ally of the UK and contribute billions to the UK economy.

Rishi Sunak would immediately on the phone to make those charges go away, that's if he hasn't already.

This is why governments and states shouldn't be allowed ownership.
 
Rooney24 said:
I find this argument coming through where people are comparing what United have spent v what City have spent totally bizarre.

we have been shit in the transfer market in recent years. Everyone knows it. But the comparison is utterly irrelevant.

the difference being that we have still spent within the FFP rules (we have just spent very poorly) City quite clearly haven’t.
Click to expand...

It's not completely bizzare. As writers from the Guardian and the Athletic put it, the contrast between City and Chelsea (can swap out Chelsea for United) rubbish any suggestions City's current status is solely due to money spent, or the very concept of "financial doping".

That of course isn't an excuse for City allegedly breaking (stupid) rules they agreed to abide by and if found guilty they can't complain if the book is thrown at them.
 
padzilla said:
There's zero chance of City getting a hefty punishment when they are owned by a state that's a key ally of the UK and contribute billions to the UK economy.

Rishi Sunak would immediately on the phone to make those charges go away, that's if he hasn't already.

This is why governments and states shouldn't be allowed ownership.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure he has that power, and any leak of that happening would be a massive scandal.

If they are found guilty, then their owners won't save them. Hence the emphasis on proving their innocence in the hearings.
 
adexkola said:
I'm not sure he has that power, and any leak of that happening would be a massive scandal.

If they are found guilty, then their owners won't save them. Hence the emphasis on proving their innocence in the hearings.
Click to expand...

It already leaked they did the same for Saudi Arabia when the Newcastle takeover bid was initially rejected. The one thing this government is good at is not worrying about being involved in scandals.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...er-league-to-approve-saudi-newcastle-takeover
 
Tender Teacher said:
As I mentioned in the post you are replying to, Manchester City's transfer fees and wages for this season are not contained within the 115 FFP charges, given those charges relate to the period between 2009-2018.


As I mentioned in the post you are replying to, the migrant kafala system in Qatar was abolished in 2016, so "nothing has changed" is factually incorrect.


Manchester City didn't agree to the FFP rules, they voted against them. Why should they accept being bullied out of the Premier League through mob rule?


Regarding the vastness of the inward investment itself, if such investment was properly controlled through a genuinely fair means of Financial "Fair" Play - for example a hard annual transfer fee/wage cap for all clubs - then why shouldn't they be allowed to own football clubs? As I detailed in the post you are replying to, such investment has done wonders for the growth of the league and wider English football over recent decades.

Regarding the human rights issue, I also previously detailed my thoughts in the post you're replying to, but my question to your assertion that we should just flatly ban the likes of UAE from investing in our country is-
And then what? How will that help to improve the human rights situation there?


I would doubt that we do most of the time, which is why you get worthless echo chambers like this thread.
Click to expand...
Arsey, condescending retorts that treat your own opinion as factual. Aye, the "teacher" part of your name is accurate.
 
adexkola said:
It's not completely bizzare. As writers from the Guardian and the Athletic put it, the contrast between City and Chelsea (can swap out Chelsea for United) rubbish any suggestions City's current status is solely due to money spent, or the very concept of "financial doping".

That of course isn't an excuse for City allegedly breaking (stupid) rules they agreed to abide by and if found guilty they can't complain if the book is thrown at them.
Click to expand...

It’s not a direct comparison though and I see it as two slightly different issues.

It’s like City inflate the books to spend 60m or whatever on Haaland.

We, within the rules, spend 80m on Maguire.

Quite clearly we have spent our money poorly but within the rules.

They have spent well but outside the rules.
 
Cloud7 said:
Is this not illegal? Like, above the level of football authorities and on the level of government tax authorities illegal?
Click to expand...
Yes it would be which is why City aren't collaborating etc, we've all seen the movies and TV shows, the first thing your lawyers tells you to do is keep your mouth shut, there's a reason for that
 
adexkola said:
Oh! I stand corrected then.

No need for "sportswashing" when they have your PMs bent over eh?
Click to expand...

It's going to happen unfortunately when you open the door for States to buy football teams. The Premier League, as powerful as they clearly are, can't be expected to hold governments to account.
 
horsechoker said:
How culpable are the players in these charges?

I know nothing will happen to them but should there be punishments for players who accept money off the books?
Click to expand...
Yes there should be and don't be so sure nothing will happen because in most circumstances that would t be tax fraud
 
padzilla said:
It's going to happen unfortunately when you open the door for States to buy football teams. The Premier League, as powerful as they clearly are, can't be expected to hold governments to account.
Click to expand...
States and countries owning football clubs is insanely ridiculous isn't it. I put it to people "what if Germany decided to buy Manchester United", because the notion is similarly absurd.

The real losers in all this (I suppose) that nobody ever seems to even mention is, well, why should the people of the Emirati State watch their leaders decide to fritter away their countries resources on Erling fecking Haaland.

Much like the Russian people footing the bill for Chelsea's success. It's not okay. Government intervention in football (particularly from neutral at best and hostile at worst -countries-) shouldn't be allowed and there are SO MANY REASONS it shouldn't. What if the Emirati State decides to obliterate Yemen once and for all?
 
Adisa said:
Wasn’t that the allegation against Mancini. That he was paid a second salary via shell companies?
Click to expand...
The leaked documents and emails showed, neigh, proved that Mancini was getting paid a million quid from the owners for 'consultancy' work thanks to his newly found football consultancy business.

The contract was signed by Mancini, so he knew exactly what was going on, and they didn't have to put this on the books as it was the owners paying directly to a business.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
It's much worse than that, I am fairly sure if City hadn't cheated, Haaland would have been playing for United.
Click to expand...

So, again, what was your point about people wearing Haaland shirts in Asia?

I said they couldn't muster more than 100 local fans to hang around outside the Emptyhad on a sunny Saturday afternoon and you start going on about fans in Asia.
 
mandroid said:
If Man Utd were doing good on field, Man Utd fans wont even mention city's financial doping, but at the moment thats the only stick they are left to beat man city with. And, they dont want anyone to talk abt the fact that Man Utd's net expenditure easily matches city's or even higher....fact is pep has totally transformed man city and Man Utd are jut playing catchup game now and it can easily be decades for them before they win title, and thats why all this bitterness. Fans all over the world just want to see their teams playing fantastic football , scoring goals and winning titles...and only one team in manchester seems to be doing all that at the moment, while fans of other one are left with no choice but to badmouth city's success...
Click to expand...
Again, you do realise that them understating their expenditure is part of the issue?
 
While the neutrals (i.e fans of small clubs) indifference to City or Newcastle is understandable, it’s always something I find extremely short sighted. Look at the bottom of the table, one of Everton and Leicester are going down. Two clubs who have finished 5th multiple times since Abu Dhabi takeover, Spurs is another who have been floundering, without the financial doping, any of those club would have been in the CL for multiple years (in Spurs case, more) and just maybe cement their position in the league or take another step. It’s not just about Utd or Liverpool or Arsenal, all of which despite the financial advantage over the rest of the league had plenty of crap years due to their own seldf sabotage. The integrity of the competition flies out of the window when one team doesn’t abide by the same set of rules for the rest.

Yes, it’s true that most of Utd or Liverpool or Arsenal’s fans indignation towards City is naked interest/jealousy, as evidenced by the Qatar twerking, yes it’s true that FFP when it was conceived favour the status quo of European football, yet nonetheless that doesn’t make what City (or Chelsea before them) did okay, we should be pushing for the sports to become more egalitarian by imposing wage/transfer cap/homegrown rule/youth incentive, rather than just shrug our shoulders and join in the metrodollar orgy because the sports jumped the sharks long ago.
 
Sassy Colin said:
So, again, what was your point about people wearing Haaland shirts in Asia?

I said they couldn't muster more than 100 local fans to hang around outside the Emptyhad on a sunny Saturday afternoon and you start going on about fans in Asia.
Click to expand...
You said most of their support is local. I don't think that's true anymore.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
Not that it'll happen, but if this is a rare case where justice is served and they're found guilty (which everyone already knows they are) - how serious could it be?

Seen talk of stripping them of their titles, relegating them etc. But could those cnut moneybag owners be banned from owning a PL club?
Click to expand...
Most likely it'll be a fine and banning transfers for a year or something. I don't think the punishment will be remotely as hard as it should.
 
Rooney24 said:
It’s not a direct comparison though and I see it as two slightly different issues.

It’s like City inflate the books to spend 60m or whatever on Haaland.

We, within the rules, spend 80m on Maguire.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like Maguire was more expensive than Haaland... Haaland's cost (over a 5 years period) is about 300M. While Maguire cost will be less than half that (130 if we go by the reports 80 + 10M/y salary). And it is not far-fetched to think Haaland and his father might have some "consultancy fees" paid for by Abu Dhabi in the Caiman Islands or the likes...

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...nd-and-the-300m-question-how-much-is-too-much


PS: I know Maguire's contract is an abomination, and we should never have spent so much money on him. But still it wouldn't have been enough to finance the Haaland move.
 
Champ said:
The leaked documents and emails showed, neigh, proved that Mancini was getting paid a million quid from the owners for 'consultancy' work thanks to his newly found football consultancy business.

The contract was signed by Mancini, so he knew exactly what was going on, and they didn't have to put this on the books as it was the owners paying directly to a business.
Click to expand...
Yeah, my point is that it is City’s responsibility to disclose this, not Mancini. I am not sure though.
It’s why I said even if City were paying players under the sofa, I don’t think the players have broken any rules.
 
Pintu said:
You make it sound like Maguire was more expensive than Haaland... Haaland's cost (over a 5 years period) is about 300M. While Maguire cost will be less than half that (130 if we go by the reports 80 + 10M/y salary). And it is not far-fetched to think Haaland and his father might have some "consultancy fees" paid for by Abu Dhabi in the Caiman Islands or the likes...

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...nd-and-the-300m-question-how-much-is-too-much


PS: I know Maguire's contract is an abomination, and we should never have spent so much money on him. But still it wouldn't have been enough to finance the Haaland move.
Click to expand...

People believing that Haaland only cost City 60m is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen. It's also probably closer to half a billion rather than 300m.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.