Premier league should take matter into their own hands and ban them from the league too. They have clearly cheated and broken the rules. The rule is a bit stupid of course, but they still broke it.
Manchester City banned from CL for 2 seasons and fined 30 million euros | CAS - Ban lifted, fined 10 million
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
Exactly, they all come from college or highschool varsity programs. You would have to totally change the system and destroy a lot of clubs in the process.
I have nothing more to add on the matter, other than to point out what a terrible and arrogant journalist Miguel Delaney is. He was repeatedly informed UEFA had problems at CAS but liked to condescend to those who dared suggest it.
I do feel a bit for City fans. They didn’t ask to be taken over by dodgy corrupt & unnethical owners.
However where I lose sympathy is when they try to spin a defence of them when it’s clear they’re dodgy bastards
However where I lose sympathy is when they try to spin a defence of them when it’s clear they’re dodgy bastards
While I'm no fan of City, I do have to agree with you on Delaney. His arrogance knows no bounds, same as Michael Cox (of Zonal Marking fame) - uber twats, the pair of em...
Yup, why college sports is such a huge industry unto itself in the US.
Maybe just also have FFP within the new private league (and follow it), to avoid these types of operations? Instead of it going to CAS and getting revoked, then a private league would be allowed to make their own rules, or make a democratic rule/vote whether a club should get banned or not (and for how long), if a shady operation like the deals you mention pops up.
I don't expect there to be a solution that solves all problems, but if just 50% of them would go away (City / PSG not invited) football would have moved forwards.
We'd feel conflicted too if we had been papering the cracks in the shining armor of Stalin for so long.
I'm sure the people who made the final decision are all driving very expensive sports cars right now...
So, having thought about the verdict for a while I've come to the conclusion that it's pretty difficult to fully take a side in this. Both parties are corrupt in their own ways, and the presence of both (in their current iterations) casts a shadow over the footballing community as a whole. No side was really here about upholding the dignity or respect of the game.
It would have been great if City had been banned (speaking as a Utd fan) but a lot of City posters have made very good points, and it does seem like UEFA haven fallen foul of their own greed and inadequacies on this one. Equally, City are not innocent in this, and it's plain to everyone (Berties included) that they've largely gotten away with one here.
The wider and more pertinent debate should now focus on the concept of a "fair" footballing culture, and how this ought to be outlined/regulated. This will always be difficult to do and have moments when it falls short, but it's presence is vital. The risk of sugar-daddy clubs making the entire game unsustainable is a very real threat - the summer of Neymar and Mbappe should act as a real warning as to how quickly football markets can be upset.
I think it's daft and, at worst, hateful to oppose new-footballing investors. The world has shifted in terms of power and wealth, and thus club's owners will too. That said, speaking objectively, does anyone here think clubs should effectively be owned/operated by and for states?
The baseline for investment/expenses should always work around the assumption that a club cannot fall into disrepair/administration if a sole owner should up and leave. Ideally, the notion of sole-ownership of a club should never happen, and fan-bodies should have a designated state in their own club. I think this needs to be the time when clubs come together and work with UEFA to improve regulations, with sustainability and competition the driving concepts. It's a shame the game is too global for wage-caps to be introduced.
It would have been great if City had been banned (speaking as a Utd fan) but a lot of City posters have made very good points, and it does seem like UEFA haven fallen foul of their own greed and inadequacies on this one. Equally, City are not innocent in this, and it's plain to everyone (Berties included) that they've largely gotten away with one here.
The wider and more pertinent debate should now focus on the concept of a "fair" footballing culture, and how this ought to be outlined/regulated. This will always be difficult to do and have moments when it falls short, but it's presence is vital. The risk of sugar-daddy clubs making the entire game unsustainable is a very real threat - the summer of Neymar and Mbappe should act as a real warning as to how quickly football markets can be upset.
I think it's daft and, at worst, hateful to oppose new-footballing investors. The world has shifted in terms of power and wealth, and thus club's owners will too. That said, speaking objectively, does anyone here think clubs should effectively be owned/operated by and for states?
The baseline for investment/expenses should always work around the assumption that a club cannot fall into disrepair/administration if a sole owner should up and leave. Ideally, the notion of sole-ownership of a club should never happen, and fan-bodies should have a designated state in their own club. I think this needs to be the time when clubs come together and work with UEFA to improve regulations, with sustainability and competition the driving concepts. It's a shame the game is too global for wage-caps to be introduced.
City seems to have gotten off because the Statue of Limitations ran out, and the punishment didnt fit the crime. I cant see where CAS says City were innocent of the charges.
Doesn't change the opinion that a football club should not be owned by a country.
Doesn't change the opinion that a football club should not be owned by a country.
And now they can go ahead and do what they like:
Were you in a cave the last 30 years? or you are only 7 years old?Liverpool. Seen as they're actually capable of challenging us. We tend not to see sides who we have finished above for seven consecutive seasons now as 'rivals'. More like noisy neighbours
It says it all, 90% of man shitty fans started following football after 2010. Before that they either were in a cave/prison or they were toddlers.
Poor guys at City... 10m fine, will they be able to survive that? Has someone started a GoFundMe yet?
Likewise, as I'm sure you will have gathered we don't tend to hold any of your achievements in the same regard we do Liverpool's either (or any other club that has won them the honest way.) Which is why we have been desperate for your lot to win it rather than a credible club and rival.Liverpool. Seen as they're actually capable of challenging us. We tend not to see sides who we have finished above for seven consecutive seasons now as 'rivals'. More like noisy neighbours
Deep down there must be a somewhat hollow feeling to City's achievements to any City fan with a brain, even more so after the leaks. I can't imagine, personally, that I would be as engaged and as emotionally invested in my club under the same circumstances.
I'd rather wait 10 years for another trophy and win it honestly, likewise I'd hate for my club to be looked down upon by oppo fans and for everything we achieve to be disregarded to some extent and viewed through 'corrupt-tinted-glasses' for want of a better phrase.
Inventing time travel solely for this seems like a bit of an overreaction.
Seriously, the letter "e" appears a total of five times in those words - and you choose "c" to replace with the euro sign?
Are they going to buy point in the league table directly soon? We know the refs are corrupt like hell in the PL. Funny enough Pool have bought them for this year in the VAR room.
The FFP and UEFA regulations are the bad guys here.
FFP = same boring clubs at the top forever. Amazing how stupid the regulations are, fair right
If you want to actually create a fair playing field. Need to end the pyramid, European club evel salary cap and no more transfer fees, with weaker clubs getting first pick on players.
Like US sports, not easy but much more interesting long term.
Draft system won't work in Europe. Plus the draft isn't perfect
But humans put men on the fecking moon, I'm sure we can find some way to reduce inequality in football using soft salary caps, strict limitations on the loan system, incentives for youth development, and so on
We need to stop crying about City, it is what it is, we certainly have the resources to challenge at the top level regardless of what they do. We are Manchester United after all.
The FFP and UEFA regulations are the bad guys here.
FFP = same boring clubs at the top forever. Amazing how stupid the regulations are, fair right
If you want to actually create a fair playing field. Need to end the pyramid, European club evel salary cap and no more transfer fees, with weaker clubs getting first pick on players.
Like US sports, not easy but much more interesting long term.
Except it would never work for football, where is the pool of players coming from? What happens to academies?
The salary cap might help, but as shown in NBA, shit teams make shit decisions and mainly the top teams still get the best free agents for the most part outside of a few exceptions where they have drafted generational talent.
Also, tanking becomes an issue and there’s no form of punishment for it.
They’re basically a completely different club now, there’s no legacy or relation to the old Man City. It’s essentially a different club using the Manchester City name. They’d change the name as well if it didn’t have Manchester in it, of which they can ride our popularity on.
Inevitable. No matter how good other teams perform they will always be able to go out and buy their place at the top back without it mattering if certain signings don't work out.
Can we add Carl Anka to this list? No idea how him and Michael Cox made it to premium offerings such as Athletic
True. But I still feel Pep's gonna Pep. His style of play sets him up for being found out. You can get at this City team at will, and they need to replace Augero and Sane on top. Foden is a top talent but he wont be able to make a D. Silva impact on his own. Fernandinho will need replacing at some point. This is before we get to their defence.
From the independent ruling by the Court of Arbitration for Sport: Manchester City FC did not disguise equity funding as sponsorship contributions.
Thank you, innocent.
Thank you, innocent.
Let the sportswashing continue!
In a few years time, Newcastle will be doing the same. How wonderful.
In a few years time, Newcastle will be doing the same. How wonderful.
Can't even be bothered, the result was inevitable anyway.
I don't buy this excuse. How many top players are playing in Abu Dhabi or China (where they can get paid shit-tonnes of money)? Top players want to play in Europe, that's just how it is for now.
The primary issue of wage caps is that it is perceived as taking money from the players and giving it to the owners. That need not be the case, in the US you have 2 kinds of wage caps:
Hard: you can't spend more than a certain amount. This amount is the outcome of negotiation between the league, owners, and players union. Here you can make an argument that the owners do have the advantage, however I would argue that advantage is marginal.
Soft: spending is unlimited, however above a certain threshold you pay tax on every additional dollar spent. The NBA uses this, but in addition stipulates the maximum amount of money you can give to any individual player over a certain amount of years. This shorts the compensation that top talent receives (LeBron James is definitely worth more than what he is being paid), but it also forces teams to be creative with their spending and move talent on when it gets too expensive to keep them.
My idea is too big for this post but I like the idea of taxing excessive spending. You want to buy $500m worth of players? Well it'll actually cost you $1.2b after taxes are taken into account. Same applies to the wage bill. That tax is distributed across the league by the way. Oh... But you get a credit for every youth player you bring through. In this paradigm you would have to ban state sponsors, but this also forces traditional big clubs to lean on more than their money to stay at the top. Oh, in addition, if you expect 150m in revenue but are looking to splurge 300m on wages, that 150m has to go into escrow immediately, to prevent clubs from going into administration.
I'm a dumbass and I came up with that. I'm sure some of Europe's brightest minds can come up with a great framework that evens the playing ground within leagues and across Europe, and allows teams doing the right things to shine.
Wait why do people hate Michael Cox? I've always liked him.
Corrupt folks get away with corruption while being investigated by corrupt folks? Say it ain't so..
They got off because there’s a statute of limitations (5 years) in Uefa’s own rules, and CAS upheld that. City are guilty as sin.
Disgusting club.
I agree a draft system is too far. Capped wages at £100k per week after tax (because tax varies), capped bonuses and maybe £50m transfer fee cap would go a long way to leveling the playing field. You cant take youth players from clubs who pretty much nurture them from young kids just because of a draft.
The big issue is would all the best players be lining up in the CSL or Saudi League.
Why do people hate any sports journalists? Unless they're racist or work for the Mail... I don't really see any reasons why anyone should.
Miguel Dalaney is a piece of shit, delighted to see the cnut with egg on his face. He's also an idiot who steals a living working for a bigger piece of shit.
He's another one. The way he tones himself down on the Athletic podcast when before he was full of it and disrespecting Ole... Twat.
I hear him frequently on the Totally Football Weekly podcast with James Richardson. He's not unbearable as Carl Anka is, but I find him quite binary. His views come across exaggerated and he talks like he's sussed everything out when I don't think he has.
He's an absolute buffoon it has to be said
On Cox, he's a Tory. And arrogant cnut, to boot.
Your proposition doesn't reduce inequality in football because you are talking about open leagues. The bolded part is the key, if you redistribute that money between the other 19 clubs then you widen the gap with all the divisions below and if you redistribute it between all professional clubs, you have basically done nothing to close the gap. Football isn't equalitarian, it has neve been and never will as long as with relegation systems and clubs/leagues with vastly different markets.
No they wouldn't... They can get paid beaucoup bucks in Saudi Arabia today but they don't because they're closer to home, the historical prestige of the leagues and the CL...
100k per week after tax may be too little but a sensible wage cap that compensates the players appropriately for what they bring to the game is possible