City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches

Dumbstar

We got another woman hater here.
Joined
Jul 18, 2002
Messages
21,286
Location
Viva Karius!
Supports
Liverpool
Just had a quick look on Blue Moon, this was the first post I saw

When they throw 100+ charges at you its basically the same tactic as the the tax office use when they audit a company. They already know what the end result of the "investigation" will be even before it started, and just throw as many vague accusations against us as possible knowing it will be impossible for us to fully clear our name in all of them. We all know the only purpose of all this is to take City down, not make an unbiased investigation. This was always going to be the case in a racist and xenophobic country as England, zero chance any of this would have happened if our owners last name was "Smith". How many other clubs have they spent 4 years investigating until they find something? None.
Lets see what the end result is, but I guess we will see a massive point reduction taking us out of all European competitions for the next season. The massive damage to our brand is already done. Really hope City plan their revenge and sue everyone.



Love to see it
Did Donald Trump write that?
 

Bluelion7

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2021
Messages
1,229
Supports
Chelsea
Couldn't be bothered to read your thesis but I doubt Chelsea will get into trouble beyond some FFP violations.
We haven’t violated FFP.

And on City… the big test will be whether this actually leads to anything, and, also, legitimate concerns about the fairness and motivations of any investigations.

If they did it, is it going to get overturned and shifted into some sort of 20m euro fine instead again?

And the obvious allowances of bias to anything that protects the two or three traditional powers on the league always astonished me. Why would an Arsenal member be allowed on the commission at all?

Finally, are they going to address the fact that FFP, at its core, violates fair, competitive business practices?

You can spend money … but only if you already have money, and a certain amount of fans already… and so on. I’m trying to imagine what this would look like in America if, say, the Dallas Cowboys were allowed a larger salary cap than other teams due to their massive fanbase.

It’s bad enough that the Ravens backup WB almost made the pro bowl simply due to fan voting. To have stuff like that affect actual team construction is weird.


That’s not “fair”. It is simply a crooked way of trying to ensure that only particular teams stay at the top by design.

Either allow people who purchase a business to compete fairly by investing however much money they are willing to risk… or have an actual “fair” cap where all teams are limited to the same amount.

FFP, as it’s structured, would violate American law, and may, if tested, violate certain international laws related to fair business practices.
 

Gandalf Greyhame

If in doubt, follow your nose!
Scout
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
7,481
Location
Red Card for Casemiro!
City paid single digit millions for their share of Girona 44% iirc.
Pere Guardiola could well afford 44.3% on his own if thats the case, this is the man who was agent to Luis Suarez, and is now one of the top dogs at Sports Entertainment Group (agents) and represents both Pep and Ten Hag. Not to mention guys like RVP etc... were all signed on with them. A few million to own a club is not a huge deal for him. He's a wealthy, wealthy individual, regardless of his connections to City.
You're right about it costing 6.5m GBP, but that's not the point here. The point is conflict of interest - the FA bars it in England (Pere could not have purchased an English club with City group), but Spain does not as highlighted in that article. The question isn't whether Pere Guardiola could afford it, the question is how Pere Guardiola, an ex-lower league footballer turned agent, with no previous club-owning experience or expertise, was mysteriously selected as a suitable equal co-owner of City group's new feeder club just a year into his brother having signed on as City's manager?
 

NicolaSacco

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2016
Messages
2,513
Supports
Ipswich
For me it seems highly unlikely they’ll be found not guilty based on everything we know.

They weren’t exonerated last time UEFA simply messed things up.

Will be very interesting to see what happens and I can’t see other clubs letting it go.
You might well be right, I definitely don’t claim any personal knowledge; I just struggle to see how you could come to that (or indeed any) conclusion and yet still not be able to specify which specific charges you think they’ll be found guilty on. Feels like a hopeful stab in the dark otherwise. Still, we shall see.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,606
Location
Manchester
You might well be right, I definitely don’t claim any personal knowledge; I just struggle to see how you could come to that (or indeed any) conclusion and yet still not be able to specify which specific charges you think they’ll be found guilty on. Feels like a hopeful stab in the dark otherwise. Still, we shall see.
I’m not claiming any personal knowledge, just discussing what we know and base my opinion on that. A number of legal experts have been discussing it online and on Sky Sports and seem to be of similar thinking.

That said we shall see.
 

DutchSerb

Full Member
Joined
May 9, 2019
Messages
989
Supports
FC Groningen
It's more severe because it's not just about breaching the financial rules, it's about knowingly misrepresenting the club's finances. It's basically fraud. They've falsified their records in order to circumvent the rules, and they've done it again and again.

Think of it like perjury. If you commit a crime, you can be punished for it. If you lie about it under oath and are found guilty of perjury, you're also punished for that on top, and it's generally more severe than the majority of crimes are on their own.

In football, purely financial breaches are generally punished by financial means (i.e. fines) while other breaches can have more severe consequences. Defrauding the governing body of English football is a much bigger deal than spending more money than you were allowed to spend. There's a very real possibility of points deductions, revoking prior titles, and even relegation. For years now, City have falsified their records and swindled their way to success in a manner that goes beyond simple over-spending, and their unapologetic threats of using lawyers to drag the prosecution indefinitely makes them all the more deserving of punishment.
Jesus Christ :lol: Watch them get away with this as well... Points deduction should definitely not be enough, unless they strip so many they're forced to relegate.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
There's no knowing how that season would have panned out under different circumstances. It just doesn't work like that.

Ole was clearly an extremely limited manager that thrived on a feelgood factor for a while, but collapsed completely when it came coaching the sides and making some of the tough decisions that were needed.
I’d go further, Ole is the biggest victim in all of this. UEFA had them bang to rights for these very same crimes a season before he came second and they squirmed their way out out v a weak UEFA / CAS. Now they’re getting done for those very same fecking crimes.
City should have had a points deduction for that season and banned from Europe which would have seen Pep walk and a player exodus. Instead they win the league and got to a CL final.
Ole may not be a top manager but that doesn’t make him finishing second to cheats any less valid than others and Klopp.
 

EtH

Full Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2021
Messages
2,712
We haven’t violated FFP.

And on City… the big test will be whether this actually leads to anything, and, also, legitimate concerns about the fairness and motivations of any investigations.

If they did it, is it going to get overturned and shifted into some sort of 20m euro fine instead again?

And the obvious allowances of bias to anything that protects the two or three traditional powers on the league always astonished me. Why would an Arsenal member be allowed on the commission at all?

Finally, are they going to address the fact that FFP, at its core, violates fair, competitive business practices?

You can spend money … but only if you already have money, and a certain amount of fans already… and so on. I’m trying to imagine what this would look like in America if, say, the Dallas Cowboys were allowed a larger salary cap than other teams due to their massive fanbase.

It’s bad enough that the Ravens backup WB almost made the pro bowl simply due to fan voting. To have stuff like that affect actual team construction is weird.


That’s not “fair”. It is simply a crooked way of trying to ensure that only particular teams stay at the top by design.

Either allow people who purchase a business to compete fairly by investing however much money they are willing to risk… or have an actual “fair” cap where all teams are limited to the same amount.

FFP, as it’s structured, would violate American law, and may, if tested, violate certain international laws related to fair business practices.
This thread has nothing to do with Chelsea or the NFL or capitalism, FFS.

Please go away.
 

Ciddy

Full Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
186
Apologies if it's already been said but I've been at work and I'm only just catching up on all of this and can't get through 27 pages!

As well as the repercussions for City it could also have a massive impact on who buys us! Certain States might think twice now knowing they won't be able to plunder money into the club as City have "allegedly" done.
 

Infra-red

Full Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
13,530
Location
left wing
Apologies if it's already been said but I've been at work and I'm only just catching up on all of this and can't get through 27 pages!

As well as the repercussions for City it could also have a massive impact on who buys us! Certain States might think twice now knowing they won't be able to plunder money into the club as City have "allegedly" done.
Another positive from today's news.
 

Seven Seas Sardines

Full Member
Joined
May 24, 2015
Messages
3,090
Location
Bolivia til 2024
If the charges stick it might speeden the process of installing an independent regulator, which in turn might help us get Sir Jim in over some genocidal arab dictators or yank investment firms. :drool:
 

Loon

:lol:
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
9,247
Location
No-Mark
It's disheartening that my first thought is the best lawyers in the world will be on this for City and nothing will be done if the accusations are upheld by the "independent" body.
 

fergieisold

New Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
7,122
Location
Saddleworth (home) Manchester (work)
We haven’t violated FFP.

And on City… the big test will be whether this actually leads to anything, and, also, legitimate concerns about the fairness and motivations of any investigations.

If they did it, is it going to get overturned and shifted into some sort of 20m euro fine instead again?

And the obvious allowances of bias to anything that protects the two or three traditional powers on the league always astonished me. Why would an Arsenal member be allowed on the commission at all?

Finally, are they going to address the fact that FFP, at its core, violates fair, competitive business practices?

You can spend money … but only if you already have money, and a certain amount of fans already… and so on. I’m trying to imagine what this would look like in America if, say, the Dallas Cowboys were allowed a larger salary cap than other teams due to their massive fanbase.

It’s bad enough that the Ravens backup WB almost made the pro bowl simply due to fan voting. To have stuff like that affect actual team construction is weird.


That’s not “fair”. It is simply a crooked way of trying to ensure that only particular teams stay at the top by design.

Either allow people who purchase a business to compete fairly by investing however much money they are willing to risk… or have an actual “fair” cap where all teams are limited to the same amount.

FFP, as it’s structured, would violate American law, and may, if tested, violate certain international laws related to fair business practices.
Seems like you are worried about Chelsea considering your attempts to soften Citeh's wrong doings.
 

Camy89

Love Island obsessive
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Messages
7,575
Location
Glasgow
Anyone who thinks an example will be made of City is deluded.

Weak spined corporates will more likely impose an absolutely ludicrous punishment such as a £150,000 fine.

Expect no justice.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Seems like you are worried about Chelsea considering your attempts to soften Citeh's wrong doings.
Of course he is. When the bodies look at 1.5b being wiped off and how unfair it is to FFP we’ll see a few asses twitch
 

Idxomer

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
15,596
I’d go further, Ole is the biggest victim in all of this. UEFA had them bang to rights for these very same crimes a season before he came second and they squirmed their way out out v a weak UEFA / CAS. Now they’re getting done for those very same fecking crimes.
City should have had a points deduction for that season and banned from Europe which would have seen Pep walk and a player exodus. Instead they win the league and got to a CL final.
Ole may not be a top manager but that doesn’t make him finishing second to cheats any less valid than others and Klopp.
This is the funniest thing I've read all year.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
This is the funniest thing I've read all year.
How? We were so comfortable in second that year it was ridiculous. The only club above us was the club that got away with the crimes they were found to have done and are the crimes that will kill the club 5 years later.
Where am I wrong?
 

EtH

Full Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2021
Messages
2,712
How? We were so comfortable in second that year it was ridiculous. The only club above us was the club that got away with the crimes they were found to have done and are the crimes that will kill the club 5 years later.
Where am I wrong?
Everywhere.
 

Don't Kill Bill

Full Member
Joined
May 14, 2006
Messages
5,697
We haven’t violated FFP.

And on City… the big test will be whether this actually leads to anything, and, also, legitimate concerns about the fairness and motivations of any investigations.

If they did it, is it going to get overturned and shifted into some sort of 20m euro fine instead again?

And the obvious allowances of bias to anything that protects the two or three traditional powers on the league always astonished me. Why would an Arsenal member be allowed on the commission at all?

Finally, are they going to address the fact that FFP, at its core, violates fair, competitive business practices?

You can spend money … but only if you already have money, and a certain amount of fans already… and so on. I’m trying to imagine what this would look like in America if, say, the Dallas Cowboys were allowed a larger salary cap than other teams due to their massive fanbase.

It’s bad enough that the Ravens backup WB almost made the pro bowl simply due to fan voting. To have stuff like that affect actual team construction is weird.


That’s not “fair”. It is simply a crooked way of trying to ensure that only particular teams stay at the top by design.

Either allow people who purchase a business to compete fairly by investing however much money they are willing to risk… or have an actual “fair” cap where all teams are limited to the same amount.

FFP, as it’s structured, would violate American law, and may, if tested, violate certain international laws related to fair business practices.

Its a competition,

The rules are agreed and signed up to.

If you want a free for all leave the league and start your own.

Or get the rules changed but don't agree, then cheat, then complain about it.
 

norm87cro

New Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
1,782
Location
Split, HR
Well it just shows how football is a hypocritical business. 100 charges dont happen over night and while I would like a points deduction if they are limited to true fair play it will criple them in the long run. Its not gonna happen though
 

eire-red

Full Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2018
Messages
2,698
We won't see them stripped of any titles I would think. That would be reserved for match-fixing and blatant cheating.

The recent points deduction of Juventus is probably a good benchmark for what we can expect. Probably a chunky points deduction and a hefty fine. Maybe a transfer ban too?
 

Rustyspider13

Full Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2020
Messages
2,391
I think we can all agree that the punishments that would be appropriate-relegation, multiple years of bans of transfers/european competition-will never happen. So I hope that at the very least they are proven guilty and we can officially recognize that which every football fan has known for a decade-they are a bunch of cheating cnuts.
 

Andycoleno9

matchday malcontent
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
29,341
Location
Croatia
We won't see them stripped of any titles I would think. That would be reserved for match-fixing and blatant cheating.

The recent points deduction of Juventus is probably a good benchmark for what we can expect. Probably a chunky points deduction and a hefty fine. Maybe a transfer ban too?
I think that too. 20-30 points deducted and transfer ban for season or two.
Which still would be great.

Shame that we must wait for months now (eelven maybe over a year) to see what happens.