Why aren't the other teams in the Premier League rallying to have City ousted?

The media aren’t incentivised to go after City too hard. SAF refused to speak to the BBC. What if they lost all access to Pep?

The Premier League itself cannot so anymore than it has already done. And until the charges are proven, commenting further only serves to make every question the validity of the league itself, which is an obvious problem.

The other clubs are also in a bind. It’s in no one’s interest to be in a league where club’s comment freely on charges that have not yet lead to allegations.

That just leaves the fans and as has been mentioned, a lot of fans don’t really care about it. City are just one more club whose resources far outstrip their own.
 
Daydreamer said:
The media aren’t incentivised to go after City too hard. SAF refused to speak to the BBC. What if they lost all access to Pep?

The Premier League itself cannot so anymore than it has already done. And until the charges are proven, commenting further only serves to make every question the validity of the league itself, which is an obvious problem.

The other clubs are also in a bind. It’s in no one’s interest to be in a league where club’s comment freely on charges that have not yet lead to allegations.

That just leaves the fans and as has been mentioned, a lot of fans don’t really care about it. City are just one more club whose resources far outstrip their own.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that they do, they're just too used to them as it's not spoken about but just accepted as everyday-business. You lot could have won the league this year, Liverpool and us could have previous years. It undermines honest clubs, but fans mostly care when it's right in front of their noses and they can see the effect face to face.

But I totally agree, there needs to be incentives or some sort of regular mentioning/shaming somehow. The problem is that the news of a take over hits once and then journous write about it, but the effects of the financial doping happens every week, but no article comes out every week saying City's ways undermines the whole league. That's the real issue.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
They’ll be paying off more people than the average fan would imagine.

They’ll be paying off other clubs’ employees.

I guarantee that if the full extent of their corruption was known it’d send shockwaves through the whole of sport, not just football.
Click to expand...

You can see how far Qatar went with the World Cup - bribing/paying EU politicians to speak positive about the human rights at the World Cup. Basically bribing for sportswashing. Would be nice if some evidence of this came out with City. It's probably only governments who can trace these sort of payments, if any - you could probably just pay off a journalist in bitcoins or with a (Picasso)painting like Platini once received for supporting Russia 2018.
 
adexkola said:
Fans of smaller clubs understand the money was earned due to historical success, so they accept being bent over by United and Liverpool. City on the other hand...

Or something.
Click to expand...
So you think breaking the rules if a sport is perfectly acceptable?

Strange. How much cheating would you accept? 12 men vs 11? Smaller goal sizes for one club?

It seems to me, because financial cheating is hidden away from the pitch, some football fans just don't understand the scale of the problem.
 
Have to laugh at the posts on here claiming that United receive a raw deal from the press and media while City have it easy.
With the exception of Liverpool no club has a greater number of proponents in the UK media than United and if they had not underachieved so massively on and off the field these last 10 years the media would be awash with complimentary coverage as it was a decade ago and still is whenever the subject of Ferguson’s era is broached.
City, meanwhile, have had a posse of investigative journalists on their trail for years and also plenty of opinion pieces downplaying their success written by many heavyweight editorial writers.
Whether that analysis is fair or not the fact remains that the scrutiny is there if you care to read it and acknowledge its existence.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
They’ll be paying off more people than the average fan would imagine.

They’ll be paying off other clubs’ employees.

I guarantee that if the full extent of their corruption was known it’d send shockwaves through the whole of sport, not just football.
Click to expand...
Are you doing alright?
 
SER19 said:
:lol:

Jesus. That team had probably the best PL goalkeeper ever, two full backs consistently among the top named in their positions, Jaap Stam was the best defender in Europe that season. The midfield was the best the premier league has ever seen, bar none. And Yorke and Cole were almost unstoppable. It was a fearless team playing incredible football and managed by the best manager there's ever been - but sure, they'd be 'annihilated'. Put down the playstation control maybe.
Click to expand...
As others have mentioned, football has changed and simply the current City side is a better team. Just how things generally progress. Obviously the 99 team is more legendary and a more iconic team though.
 
I imagine the other teams don't say much because it doesn't really make much of a difference to them.

If it wasn't City winning because they spend more money it would be Chelsea, United, or Liverpool. It's a league of big spenders, I could see Arsenal and Spurs caring more though, as they have been pushed out more.

To some teams they probably think the other top teams are getting a taste of their own medicine a bit.
 
ROFLUTION said:
I'd argue that they do, they're just too used to them as it's not spoken about but just accepted as everyday-business. You lot could have won the league this year, Liverpool and us could have previous years. It undermines honest clubs, but fans mostly care when it's right in front of their noses and they can see the effect face to face.

But I totally agree, there needs to be incentives or some sort of regular mentioning/shaming somehow. The problem is that the news of a take over hits once and then journous write about it, but the effects of the financial doping happens every week, but no article comes out every week saying City's ways undermines the whole league. That's the real issue.
Click to expand...

I'm actually surprised the pro-scouse figures haven't come out and made a point about it more. Through hard work, a plan, and clever buys, Liverpool put together a very good team that would have otherwise won multiple titles, but they were ultimately put to bed and thoroughly outlasted by the state-backed club. The best run they have had, and probably will have for a long time, is basically a footnote in PL history, secondary to City.
 
Hammondo said:
As others have mentioned, football has changed and simply the current City side is a better team. Just how things generally progress. Obviously the 99 team is more legendary and a more iconic team though.
Click to expand...

That's ridiculous though it's like when people say Pele wouldn't cope with today's game. In such a science fiction hypothetical you have to allow for some sort of standardised comparison in which case the current United team, is far better.

To pretend jaap stam wouldn't walk into that city side is just laughable. Likewise the midfield.
 
TheGame said:
In response to the OP as with anything, it’s probably best to let the investigation play out and not comment until it’s complete.
Click to expand...

Yup. There's little point commenting until the charges are proven. Then there will be plenty of noise around what the punishments should be.
 
SER19 said:
That's ridiculous though it's like when people say Pele wouldn't cope with today's game. In such a science fiction hypothetical you have to allow for some sort of standardised comparison in which case the current United team, is far better.

To pretend jaap stam wouldn't walk into that city side is just laughable. Likewise the midfield.
Click to expand...
Yes and no, they would be trained differently and would play a very different style of football both as individuals and as a team. Without this then yes City would win, with this then I do not know, both teams are strong and its a difficult comparison. I personally think our 2008 team was better than our 1999.
 
Hammondo said:
You are just a conspiracy theorist, do you have anything to back your claims up?
Click to expand...

It’s more of a conspiracy theory to suggest City wouldn’t have done that.

Do you have anything to back up your opinion that City aren’t willing to pay off high ranking people in football across the board?

When a club has 100 plus charges of essentially breaking rules via underhand methods, it’s fairly safe to assume there will be people paid off beyond their own organisation.

But you carry on.
 
Last edited:
Hammondo said:
Yes and no, they would be trained differently and would play a very different style of football both as individuals and as a team. Without this then yes City would win, with this then I do not know, both teams are strong and its a difficult comparison. I personally think our 2008 team was better than our 1999.
Click to expand...
:o Pointless comparison as it goes without saying that different eras have different resources/conditions (money, data, technology, nutrition, bigger squads, bigger scouting and coaching teams, etc.)
As pointless (and equally predictable) that there will be posts in 2047 suggesting how some team from 2047 pisses all over Man City 2023.
Back to actual real events when we beat THAT Juventus team and midfield in 99 it confirmed how strong that United team was in that moment/season. Same team, another season, different story. But in 99 as proved over and over again, no one was beating us when it really mattered. We had quality, belief, mentality and momentum.

Generally speaking even if we leave 99 out, I believe United 1993/94, United 2007/08, Liverpool when they won it a couple of years ago and Chelsea 2004/05/06 all would be at least as good as the current City team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fortitude
Hammondo said:
As others have mentioned, football has changed and simply the current City side is a better team. Just how things generally progress. Obviously the 99 team is more legendary and a more iconic team though.
Click to expand...
They might have a better squad, but man for man United easily had the better first 11. In the 3 substitute era Solskjaer, Sheringham, Butt and Brown are more than a match for their subs as well. Those players with today's coaching and fitness levels would wipe the floor with this City team. If you're being generous then 3 of this City team make the first 11 for United in 99 (Haaland, De Bruyne and Dias).

There's some massive recency bias going on with football in general. None of the European leagues are as competitive as they were and the standards of the top teams in the CL is really low these days. Attackers are more protected than ever and coupled with the fact that defending in general is the pits it makes today's attackers seem better than they really are. It's really not a coincidence that almost every major national team goalscoring has fallen or will shortly fall and it's not because the players today are so much better.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
It’s more of a conspiracy theory to suggest City wouldn’t have done that.

Do you have anything to back up your opinion that City aren’t willing to pay off high ranking people in football across the board?

When a club has 100 plus charges off essentially breaking rules via underhand methods, it’s fairly safe to assume there will be people paid off beyond their own organisation.

But you carry on.
Click to expand...
You must believe in a lot of things then if you use that logic. Santa Claus must exist.
 
As alluded to by some in this thread:

Dansk said:
It's just dull. After flinging enough oil money at players, the wheel landed on a generational talent and they reap the rewards. They have no need to be frugal and do all they can to ensure they spend wisely, they don't need to think about cultivating their own youth players in order to replenish the squad, they don't need to care how much a player's agent wants for facilitating the transfer. Just ring up the sheikh and purchase success, breaking the regulations as you go because you're confident that your army of celebrity lawyers can stave off any consequences.

It is to football what Marxists feared the end stage of capitalism would be, when it all falls apart because the system has been pushed to an unsustainable extreme and worn away any notions of fairness and regard for life. Scoring record amounts of goals for a soulless, corrupt husk of a club that has purchased off-the-shelf success with money it never earned. Football at its worst. Breaking the sport down into pure business and cold, mechanical success achieved by players who are only there because it's what pays the most and has the highest chance of adding trophies to their resumes. Not one player at that club is there because they admire what Manchester City stands for, or has worked for. It's raw business, zero soul.

Meanwhile, all other clubs are pushed down and kept from achieving success because nothing can compete with that unless you have it yourself. It isn't possible to use sporting results and cultural appeal to compete with City because there are limits to what those things can bring you. There are no limits to what unrestrained spending of infinite funds can do. The biggest, most popular and historically successful clubs are swept aside by this arbitrary vessel for the whitewashing of a human rights nightmare's geopolitical reputation.
Click to expand...
balaks said:
You are now experiencing what most other clubs in the league have experienced for decades with the likes of Utd, Chelsea, etc. spending way beyond what other clubs could spend year on year.
Click to expand...
That_Bloke said:
That's because he doesn't play for you.


Yeah, nobody likes to be on the receiving end, although there's an extra bit of bitterness due to the fact he's playing for the other city's club. The "hollow", "meaningless", etc comments sound so petty and small time.

It's a team that left its mark on the PL and football in general and will be remembered for a very, very long time. Just as Haaland will.
Click to expand...

but surely clubs don’t perceive this in the same manner as fans?
 
I'm a better scientist than Isaac Newton ever was.
I have more knowledge than him. I can do things he could only dream.
My bet is I'm not going to be in the history books when I die and he will still be considered if not the best, a totally deserved top-3 scientist of all time (to me, number 1).

2023 City would probably beat 99 United most of the times, but it proves absolutely nothing. Context is too different. As me crushing Newton in a physics contest proves nothing regarding our intelligence, imagination and genius.
 
Since the media have suddenly gone really quiet about all these charges I think its about time the other clubs did take action to prevent this from being brushed under the carpet, maybe once this season is other the other 19 teams that will be in next seasons Premier League along with anyone they draw in the cups should refuse to play City until the charges are dealt with.
 
This is typical of the Premier ...... No action with Man C & no action with Everton.
 
Fortitude said:
As alluded to by some in this thread:





but surely clubs don’t perceive this in the same manner as fans?
Click to expand...
Clubs are selfish. They don't want to set a precedence, not to mention that many clubs do not agree with the rules and the whole FFP thing because they see it as favoring old money. They're resentful that the football landscape makes it almost impossible to compete organically and see these regulations as an attempt of the elite to maintain the status quo. As for the elite, well they could be bought themselves any second and with the current recession and unstable financial times, who knows, they might need foreign investment and bend the rules a little bit themselves.
 
Ive always said clubs should boycott matches v City if it turns out they have broken the rules with clear and obvious intent and the PL does nothing to punish them thoroughly. The COVID year was the where the rig really revealed itself. Every club reported a loss and less revenues, except for Man City who actually reported higher revenues - how is this possible when matchday revenue for all clubs went down to almost zero? They have too many sponsorships by UAE businesses and you just know much of it is dirty and corrupt.

They are taking the rest of the league for suckers, as we all follow the rules will they actively dodge the rules with the intention of giving themselves an artificial advantage.

And someone explain to me why Pep isnt a disgraced figure. The Barcelona payments to referee scandal spans his entire time their, and now this FFP cheat allegations span his entire time at City. He is the Lance Armstrong of football. Corruption and allegations of rigging and cheating has followed him wherever he goes
 
MonsieurGooner said:
Ive always said clubs should boycott matches v City if it turns out they have broken the rules with clear and obvious intent and the PL does nothing to punish them thoroughly. The COVID year was the where the rig really revealed itself. Every club reported a loss and less revenues, except for Man City who actually reported higher revenues - how is this possible when matchday revenue for all clubs went down to almost zero? They have too many sponsorships by UAE businesses and you just know much of it is dirty and corrupt.

They are taking the rest of the league for suckers, as we all follow the rules will they actively dodge the rules with the intention of giving themselves an artificial advantage.

And someone explain to me why Pep isnt a disgraced figure. The Barcelona payments to referee scandal spans his entire time their, and now this FFP cheat allegations span his entire time at City. He is the Lance Armstrong of football. Corruption and allegations of rigging and cheating has followed him wherever he goes
Click to expand...

Because they weren't paying people to take up the empty seats.

He wins trophies and he reinvented football, financial doping at City, referees being paid at Barca, blood doping in Spanish football that was burned by the authorities, hiring the doctor who he blamed for his drug ban as a player.... none of that matters.
 
If the other teams could afford to, they might boycott City. But most teams would be financially hurting themselves even more and they don't have the financial buffer City have. A truly no-win situation.
 
tenpoless said:
Now now.. lets not get too carried away. The guy invented calculus
Click to expand...

To me, he is the greatest scientist of all time.
However, he would lose to me in a physics contest.

“If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”

Guess who said it... :lol:
 
City should be docked points or even relegated like Juventus had been.
 
If I was a fan of Atletico or FC Bayern I would be disgusted about my club agreeing to play Man City in pre-season friendlies, fans of both clubs should be pressuring their chairman to cancel these as a show of solidarity with the other 19 Premier League teams.
 
MonsieurGooner said:
Ive always said clubs should boycott matches v City if it turns out they have broken the rules with clear and obvious intent and the PL does nothing to punish them thoroughly. The COVID year was the where the rig really revealed itself. Every club reported a loss and less revenues, except for Man City who actually reported higher revenues - how is this possible when matchday revenue for all clubs went down to almost zero? They have too many sponsorships by UAE businesses and you just know much of it is dirty and corrupt.

They are taking the rest of the league for suckers, as we all follow the rules will they actively dodge the rules with the intention of giving themselves an artificial advantage.

And someone explain to me why Pep isnt a disgraced figure. The Barcelona payments to referee scandal spans his entire time their, and now this FFP cheat allegations span his entire time at City. He is the Lance Armstrong of football. Corruption and allegations of rigging and cheating has followed him wherever he goes
Click to expand...
Good post
 
Gentleman Jim said:
Have to laugh at the posts on here claiming that United receive a raw deal from the press and media while City have it easy.
With the exception of Liverpool no club has a greater number of proponents in the UK media than United and if they had not underachieved so massively on and off the field these last 10 years the media would be awash with complimentary coverage as it was a decade ago and still is whenever the subject of Ferguson’s era is broached.
City, meanwhile, have had a posse of investigative journalists on their trail for years and also plenty of opinion pieces downplaying their success written by many heavyweight editorial writers.
Whether that analysis is fair or not the fact remains that the scrutiny is there if you care to read it and acknowledge its existence.
Click to expand...

Wow
 
Hammondo said:
As others have mentioned, football has changed and simply the current City side is a better team. Just how things generally progress. Obviously the 99 team is more legendary and a more iconic team though.
Click to expand...

Irwin, Stam, Keane, Scholes, Giggs, all walk into that team as first choice. They’d all be the most expensive players in their positions if sold in the current era on their 99 form.

Others, such as Schmeichel and Neville would probably had a shout, only omitted due to changes in playing styles in those positions.

Beckham would have probably walked in as he’d have been a KdB type if coming through now.

I’ll accept your point that football has changed and a team that just keeps the ball and has a litany of talent in a 23 man squad would win a league over ‘99 United, and even in a one off game. But I don’t think the players in any City Best XI would be better. It’s coaching and systems.

Give ‘99 United with their money at the time 5 subs, a larger squad, assembled with no budget constraints, and not have that squad existing just a couple of years after a foreign player limit… it’s probably have pissed all over Europe for years.

This City squad is hugely impressive and its achievements undeniable. But you can’t acknowledge modernisation without acknowledging all the hamstringing elements of that United team and squad.

Edit ::: Obviously Irwin wouldn’t have fetched huge sums due to age. But you get the point.
 
UnrelatedPsuedo said:
Irwin, Stam, Keane, Scholes, Giggs, all walk into that team as first choice. They’d all be the most expensive players in their positions if sold in the current era on their 99 form.

Others, such as Schmeichel and Neville would probably had a shout, only omitted due to changes in playing styles in those positions.

Beckham would have probably walked in as he’d have been a KdB type if coming through now.

I’ll accept your point that football has changed and a team that just keeps the ball and has a litany of talent in a 23 man squad would win a league over ‘99 United, and even in a one off game. But I don’t think the players in any City Best XI would be better. It’s coaching and systems.

Give ‘99 United with their money at the time 5 subs, a larger squad, assembled with no budget constraints, and not have that squad existing just a couple of years after a foreign player limit… it’s probably have pissed all over Europe for years.

This City squad is hugely impressive and its achievements undeniable. But you can’t acknowledge modernisation without acknowledging all the hamstringing elements of that United team and squad.

Edit ::: Obviously Irwin wouldn’t have fetched huge sums due to age. But you get the point.
Click to expand...
Of course, I do not think anyone is saying they have more talented players, they do not, but the way they have been trained and the style they play would win them the game.

Obviously they have some stand out players like Aguero, De Bruyne, David Silva etc who could be argued would take the spot of some of the Man united 99 players, but overall the 99 squad is more talented.
 
From a non big club perspective, all the big clubs complaining about City is hilarious. The reality is that football has been a closed shop for years now with nobody else having much of a chance of winning anything as they are not able to compete financially with the big clubs. On the rare occasion that someone does put together a competitive team, their players will almost certainly be poached and the team broken up.

FFP enhanced this problem as it simply works to keep the historically big clubs at the top and stops anyone else from being able to invest and compete.

The only fair way to go forward would be to put rules in place that make it a level playing field (such as a salary/transfer fee cap).

I think you would struggle to find any fan of a non big club who feels any sympathy for the premier league elite and more than a few that are glad the big clubs are on the receiving end of things for once.

The whole system needs a overhaul to make things fair and competitive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jojojo
Just to open up the discussion with another legendary team from an earlier generation.
City or United 99 Vs the Miracle Men?

Shilton,
Anderson
Lloyd
Burns
Clark
O’Neil
McGovern
Gemmill
Robertson
Birtles
Woodcock

Obviously the pace of the game and fitness alone would mean be telling, but if you could get Robbo to actually train, give up chips and the half time ciggy?
 
They need to run that part of football like the NFL does in American football. The PL would need to draft a set of rules like the Nfl and if a team breaks those rules then ownership of that said team could be ousted with a 75% agreement from the other owners.
Also of course the NFL never would let a state run team in their ranks. The other owners have to agree on ownership. The PL really needs to change in this regard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.