Samuel was an incel before incel's were a thing. So this doesn't surprise me in the least.
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with 130 FFP breaches | Hearing begins 16th Sep 2024 | Concluded 9th Dec 2024 - Awaiting outcome
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) discuss United's fantastic win away against Athletic Club in the semi-final of the Europa League.
They also pick out the positives of United's 4-3 loss away at Brentford, and Nik reviews a day out at Old Trafford watching Manchester United Women qualify for the Champions League.
Great points, absolutely not a complete waste of time. Bravo.
That’s all your post deserved anyway..
Multiple replies gave detail on why your post was idiotic but you opted to respond to the one that didn't, I wonder why that might be?
I don’t care about relegation or asterisks. City’s revenue and current sponsorships need to be reviewed and brought in line with reality.
A bit like catching lance Armstrong doping then asking him not to race one year but his high VO2 max and lactate threshold become the new baseline for his future racing.
A bit like catching lance Armstrong doping then asking him not to race one year but his high VO2 max and lactate threshold become the new baseline for his future racing.
Urgh, but it isn't hundreds of millions. They didn't invent sponsorships all together, they inflated them.
We'll see what comes out. If it's the version that you and others have been able to excitedly convince themselves it is then I'll come back and hold my hands up.
A filthy club that have cooked their books but nothing I've read or listened to about the case suggest it is amounts that are the difference between mid table for a decade and where they are.
I know you WANT it to be the crime of the century and I'd love it to be but it's definitely gotten blown up in many over excited fans heads. My only point is that their cheating hasn't made the difference between them remaining mid table and not, which your comment of "hundreds of millions" suggest.
Can you provide some sources for this? It appears they inflated the wtohad sponsorship deal (from memory it was from like 50/60 to 80 or something? Though I could be wrong on those numbers)
Paid mancini off the books (like 5 mill I think I've always heard and read?).
Most of the charges are around refusing to co-operate.
So please do provide this solid evidence of all the "hundreds of millions" they magicked out of thin air. Or solid reports about it because all I can read is very vague and from what I can tell, fans have built this up in their heads massively.
Happy to read this solid reporting though that shows I'm really wild of the mark.
Nobody is saying they should be allowed to continue cheating. They don't only need to be told to start obeying the rules, that's a given. They also need to actually be punished too. In fact it's the strength of the punishment that will make them comply or not. How else do you "bring them in line"? Relegation etc is the way to do that.
Last edited:
In 2011, Etihad Airways sponsored City’s stadium and shirts for 10 years for £400m.
So maybe that was because they were impressed by City’s year on year, decade after decade success leading to world renown? In the preceding 40 years, Man City had won League Cup, one FA Cup (literally just) and a Div 2 championship
So maybe it was the normal market rate and they DIDN’T inflate it by “hundreds of millions”. But Arsenal had a virtually similar deal from an airline (Fly Emirates) and that was just £90m for 15 years
… and in the previous 20 years (not the 40 I referenced for City), Arsenal had won four Div 1/PL titles, a European trophy, five FA Cups and a League CupSo maybe it was because Etihad were the market leaders with decades of success (that City didn’t have)? But that year, Etihad reported its first ever profit
So they didn’t pay the market rate OR ANYWHERE NEAR IT…. they didn’t pay a little extra because they were getting a global brand with a HUGE fan base … they didn’t pay for a successful club. They massively over inflated a sponsorship deal for an average club purely because they could throw “hundreds of millions” away and not blink and because they were effectively owner/sponsor.
In my family and friends, I know United fans, Liverpool fans, Villa fans, Everton fans, Forest fans, even City fans. Every single one of them including a long term mate who’s a City fan and season ticket holder says they massively cheated… Colin just doesn’t care (though to be slightly fair to him, he has supported them for 40+ years home and away).
It’s just journalist shills and fake fans who think it was nothing/minor.
No City fan, or in fact anyone, has ever been able to explain this valuation.In 2011, Etihad Airways sponsored City’s stadium and shirts for 10 years for £400m.
So maybe that was because they were impressed by City’s year on year, decade after decade success leading to world renown? In the preceding 40 years, Man City had won League Cup, one FA Cup (literally just) and a Div 2 championship
So maybe it was the normal market rate and they DIDN’T inflate it by “hundreds of millions”. But Arsenal had a virtually similar deal from an airline (Fly Emirates) and that was just £90m for 15 years
So maybe it was because Etihad were the market leaders with decades of success (that City didn’t have)? But that year, Etihad reported its first ever profit
So they didn’t pay the market rate OR ANYWHERE NEAR IT…. they didn’t pay a little extra because they were getting a global brand with a HUGE fan base … they didn’t pay for a successful club. They massively over inflated a sponsorship deal for an average club purely because they could throw “hundreds of millions” away and not blink and because they were effectively owner/sponsor.
In my family and friends, I know United fans, Liverpool fans, Villa fans, Everton fans, Forest fans, even City fans. Every single one of them including a long term mate who’s a City fan and season ticket holder says they massively cheated… Colin just doesn’t care (though to be slightly fair to him, he has supported them for 40+ years home and away).
It’s just journalist shills and fake fans who think it was nothing/minor.
Get the new football authority to evaluate all sponsorship deals.
Yeah right will it happen as Lord Pannick will sue The King or somesuch, but it should happen before Saudi newcastle v UAE city is as good as it gets.
Yeah right will it happen as Lord Pannick will sue The King or somesuch, but it should happen before Saudi newcastle v UAE city is as good as it gets.
Bloody norma
He'll come and have a go at you now just like he did with meBloody norma
There's some posts that just show such a criminal lack of any sort of comprehension, that it's not even worth engaging beyond a couple of words and a smileyHe'll come and have a go at you now just like he did with me
But the whole City project has been a form of doping. It’s just the financial kind.
There’s nothing about City’s current standing or success as a club that’s organic.
Not true, only 35 of the charges relate to non-cooperation. However, they are the most suspicious and the clearest indication that City have something to hide.
Right, unfortunately, I cannot ask for the accounts to give you evidence but I get it, you think Man City did not cheat and overinflate anything.
I dont think it will come out or its the crime of the century, stop putting words in my mouth. You are asking me for evidence, can you give me evidence that Mancini was paid 5m off books? How do you know it was 5m?
Pep's brother being appointed chairman and part of other City group companies, players paid off books etc.. but ofcourse you think its only a few mill, 4/5m.
Why would a club not provide its accounts or access to its books for years? because it has something to hide.
I cant believe you think that City actually have the highest revenue in the PL... if someone who believes that is true... then no point me discussing anything further with you.
Just like Newcastle wouldn't still be battling relegation if they weren't able spend half a billion on players the last 3 years..
Of course they would have been at least mid table. They probably would actually be much worse.
The Thai owner ended up in living in exile for whatever shenanigans he was up to. The Uk wouldn't even grant him asylum.
The guy from Abu Dhabi who organised the sale of Man City in 2008, went to jail a year later for stealing money from his wife or something to buy Portsmouth.
So, without all the cheating they probably would have ended up worse than Portsmouth.
This should be enough to be kicked out of PL. Refusing to co-operate the league you are willingly taken part and rules that you willingly accept.
Get the feeling something is going to be announced imminently.
But Newcastle aren't accused of any charges or financial misconduct?
Your conflating investment from an outside party and cheating.
The poster seems to think that refusing to co-operate with providing financials is a minor breach and that they have only been cheating to the tune of 5m over the 12 years.
Seems to think that it is a fact that City produce the most revenue in the PL...
He just heard it.
That’s enough for me. Case closed!
Let’s take him at face value. Even if it’s smaller amounts, they still enable signings of players, managers, staff etc
Ultimately though I suspect he’ll be back here telling us all how right he was…because the punishment likely won’t fit the crime
Not really, just providing you with information of what the previous and potential owners of City were like. If you think they would have been above mid table without all the cheating etc. Just look at where Portsmouth have ended up when the guy who brokered the City deal went there, he's the reason ownership rules were changed.
Also, we know now that Newcastle have to play within the rules now. But lets not pretend they wouldn't have been relegated if they weren't bought by SA.
Which contradicts your above point - you've said Newcastle have had to play by the rules and have went from relegation battlers to competing in the CL & winning cups within 2-3 seasons, so they've done that by spending money within the rules.
Which is what City could've done - and the result would've been the same. The obviously wanted to fast track that and bend the rules as much as possible, which is why they are being charged. They likely would've got there by toeing the line like Newcastle have done - even more so because the rules weren't as strict back then. There is no chance that they would have been middling round in mid-table if they had followed the rules.
Never forget that when they first started spending big money, this is where the club was
This is the type of club it should always be associated with and thought of.
"I wasn't aware there was another Manchester club"
I will never forget this personally. Cause that's the kind of "respect" they deserve or lack there of.
I reckon it will beon Tuesday after England’s last match so it’s not a distraction for the England camp but still a week before the next EPL match.
Yep, we all know they will get away with it, doesn't mean they haven't done it. I mean its clear and obvious to everyone really.
It wouldn't come to anyone as a shock when all their sponsors have something to do with the royal family.
Never said that.
I can't believe people don't understand the issue with what City have done.
https://offthepitch.com/a/exclusive...no-staff-no-active-products-and-being-run-out
Even as late as 2 years ago City appear to have been making fake companies who sponsored the club.
Holding on to these accounts will have allowed them to be doctored. It should be the same as when Rio missed his drugs test, a missed deadline is a fail and the punishment is administered.
The problem is we will never know. Its about signing the right players at the right time, would have they signed the stars they did, if they had to take their time and abide by the rules or would those players have gone elsewhere.
Then subsequently if they hadn't made the champions league would they have been attracting big name players again?
Absolutely. I always wonder if Abu Dhabi only bought the club because it's in Manchester.
This isnt a battle of "are they or arent they." This outcome is about whether we are following a very corrupt sport or one who will do the right thing. Man City are guilty. You'd have to be stupid or ignorant not to see that. You dont go from losing 7-0 to Middlesboro to league champions in 3 years without some clear breach of fair play and sponsorship tampering. The outcome is less to do about this plastic made up football club and more to do with whether we as a sport allow this to happen and feck the rest. It would be a nail in the coffin of the sport if they dont get a major groundbreaking punishment.
Completely agree, especially with your last sentence. I've said before in here that if they don't get the punishment we all know they deserve then all the other clubs should refuse to play them. If that doesn't work then we must start a new league.
As has been said many times. They signed up to the rules and regulations and ignored them to get a ridiculous boost to their finances which then filters down through the club and league and other competitions.
Of course we'll know. They wouldn't. Without the money pouring in from their owners, they wouldn't even have got started. No record breaking transfer of Robinho, no Silva, no Aguerro, even the lower priced players like Kompany who they might have still been able to afford pre-Abu-Dhabi takeover would have been unlikely to join a team who ended their season under previous ownership with an 8-1 hammering by Middlesbrough. They were a nothing club in terms of world football back then. Literally all that changed was the money.
Exactly, its so obvious. They could go from signing a keeper one window, realising he is rubbish and then having money to sign another season after.
Generally, you dont get that, they went on a massive spending spree. People forget this, just because recently they have calmed down and have a lower net cost, doesn't change the fact that they cheated.
Kompany joined just before the takeover, to be fair, as did Zabaleta.
Jo was their marquee signing that summer, before they suddenly had the money for Robinho.
Of course we believe no chance but they could have brought one or 2 record breaking signings per window and transformed themselves eventually. My issue is they are getting sponsorships with a value similar to us and Real and Barca when its obvious they didnt have that kind of following.
But look at us, just because you spend money doesnt mean you will be successful they have to buy the right players it just allowed them to blow off the ones that didnt work with little thought of recouping as much money as possible.
Me too. Get the feeling they'll be found innocent of most charges but there'll be a big fallout from this!