Manchester City risk of getting CL banned

DevilAgeIdiot · Jun 8, 2019

andyox said:
I know you’ve got quite a few talking points that you’re obviously passionate about and keep repeating, but they don’t bear any relevance to anything I wrote in the post that you’ve quoted.

I’m here on a United forum because I happen to think it’s the best football forum on the internet, with a good mix of United fans and fans of other clubs. I’m happy to discuss and debate any topic with you or any poster on the forum. That’s what forums are all about.

By all means, if you want to talk about human rights and sportswashing then I’m happy to discuss and debate with you, but it would probably be best in a separate thread. This thread is about FFP and a potential CL ban so I’d rather not derail it with other issues.

"I think most of that is just because we've a much smaller fanbase."
If you truly beleive that you are deluded.
The reason you are being ignored is precisely because of the horrific nature of the cheating project's blood money PR racket.
If any other small club was legitimately succeeding at the rate the UAE project is then the coverage and recognition would be out of this world.

"..so I’d rather not derail it with other issues."
Don't be so sensitive. We really don't mind rival fans posting here if they are reasonable. Just be careful about cheer leading the project of the disgusting human rights abusers and slaughterers of innocent Yemeni children. Ultimately you can not seperate the cheating PR project and the horror it represents from the ffp investigations and any other wrongdoings the projects up to.

And learn to be a little self aware.
When repeatedly claiming you don't care what rival fans media think about the horrific sportswashing project you must remember you are precisely defending the project on a rival fan's forum/media.

If you don't care what rival fans think about the blood money PR project then why bother defending it on a daily basis precisely on a rival fan's forum? Havent you got something more productive in your life to get on with.

andyox · Jun 8, 2019

DevilAgeIdiot said:
"I think most of that is just because we've a much smaller fanbase."
If you truly beleive that you are deluded.
The reason you are being ignored is precisely because of the horrific nature of the cheating project's blood money PR racket.
If any other small club was legitimately succeeding at the rate the UAE project is then the coverage and recognition would be out of this world.

"..so I’d rather not derail it with other issues."
Don't be so sensitive. We really don't mind rival fans posting here if they are reasonable. Just be careful about cheer leading the project of the disgusting human rights abusers and slaughterers of innocent Yemeni children. Ultimately you can not seperate the cheating PR project and the horror it represents from the ffp investigations and any other wrongdoings the projects up to.

And learn to be a little self aware.
When repeatedly claiming you don't care what rival fans media think about the horrific sportswashing project you must remember you are precisely defending the project on a rival fan's forum/media.

If you don't care what rival fans think about the blood money PR project then why bother defending it on a daily basis precisely on a rival fan's forum? Havent you got something more productive in your life to get on with.

@nore1975’s post was specifically about City breaking FFP and how that impacts broader recognition of our achievements. I responded with my opinion on that topic. Fairly simple.

It’s not about sensitivity or self-awareness, it’s about maintaining the focus of a thread. As I’ve already said, absolutely happy to discuss the other issues you’ve raised in another thread if you’d like.

DevilAgeIdiot · Jun 8, 2019

andyox said:
@nore1975’s post was specifically about City breaking FFP and how that impacts broader recognition of our achievements. I responded with my opinion on that topic. Fairly simple.

It’s not about sensitivity or self-awareness, it’s about maintaining the focus of a thread. As I’ve already said, absolutely happy to discuss the other issues you’ve raised in another thread if you’d like.

Wrong, it is precisely about sensitivity and awareness. I know many decent City fans who no longer support the club under the ownership of the Gulf state human rights abusers and slaughterers of Yemeni innocents. They understand that one can not seperate supporting the billion pounds plus UAE project from cheerleading and hence sportswashing the horrific regime, just as they understand that you can not seperate their unethical rule breaking from their systemic human rights abuses.

All the wrongdoings are intrinsically linked and part of the sportswashing project.
Once the UAE slaughterers of Yemeni children and systemic abusers of human rights, (dont take my word for it, see Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch) pack up, they will once again support City.

City fans like yourself, who have been weaponised as UAE defenders can not see the barbaric truth of their cheerleading support for the Etihad PR, sportswashing project, as they are blinded by a false sense of glory they attach to the violent regime's blood money project. This is precisely because you could not succeed legitimately and have been so starved of any success that your ethics fly out the window as the Gulf state murderers buy our trophies under your club's name.

mwake · Jun 8, 2019

A bit cynical, but isn't this the issue though that Man City have the resources to drag this on and on through the court system to the point where Uefa gives up on some level. That is the nightmare situation. If City is innocent then I'm all for them making their case and getting justice but the alleged insidious machiavellian movements of Citys money men scare the life out of me.

And if all that fails for City you then wonder that they will start banging the drums for the Super League which would essentially make Uefa impotent like the way the Premier League did it to The FA. It just looks like a road map for victory for City regardless of whether they are guilty or innocent. As I said if it's done right then I have no qualms about City being able to prove that they have adhered to the law of the game, but I also worry that City could play the long game and that they'll try and get the Superleague support started and finished as a way of covering up for past financial irregularities and a way to escape Uefa and FFP for good. Uefa is looking like David against Goliath somewhat.

Needham · Jun 8, 2019

Wishful thinking. In truth, I'd rather Liverpool got CL banned and City PL banned. Klopp has the same nous on getting to the very latter stages that late-Fergie had.

finneh · Jun 8, 2019

The most idiotic thing about this whole saga is the fact that these blatantly overinflated related party sponsorship deals weren't scrutinised thoroughly in the first place.

A 10 year old with an abacus could have seen that half of City's commercial revenue a couple of years ago was bogus.

Basically the governing body swept it under the carpet, but now are making a big song and dance because they've been shown to be incompetent by a newspaper.

Verminator · Jun 8, 2019

mwake said:
A bit cynical, but isn't this the issue though that Man City have the resources to drag this on and on through the court system to the point where Uefa gives up on some level. That is the nightmare situation. If City is innocent then I'm all for them making their case and getting justice but the alleged insidious machiavellian movements of Citys money men scare the life out of me.

And if all that fails for City you then wonder that they will start banging the drums for the Super League which would essentially make Uefa impotent like the way the Premier League did it to The FA. It just looks like a road map for victory for City regardless of whether they are guilty or innocent. As I said if it's done right then I have no qualms about City being able to prove that they have adhered to the law of the game, but I also worry that City could play the long game and that they'll try and get the Superleague support started and finished as a way of covering up for past financial irregularities and a way to escape Uefa and FFP for good. Uefa is looking like David against Goliath somewhat.

If UEFA, and by extension FIFA, felt they would not be governing a breakaway league of any sort, they would threaten expulsion from international football, of any player partaking.
It would wither on the vine.

andyox · Jun 8, 2019

mwake said:
A bit cynical, but isn't this the issue though that Man City have the resources to drag this on and on through the court system to the point where Uefa gives up on some level. That is the nightmare situation. If City is innocent then I'm all for them making their case and getting justice but the alleged insidious machiavellian movements of Citys money men scare the life out of me.

And if all that fails for City you then wonder that they will start banging the drums for the Super League which would essentially make Uefa impotent like the way the Premier League did it to The FA. It just looks like a road map for victory for City regardless of whether they are guilty or innocent. As I said if it's done right then I have no qualms about City being able to prove that they have adhered to the law of the game, but I also worry that City could play the long game and that they'll try and get the Superleague support started and finished as a way of covering up for past financial irregularities and a way to escape Uefa and FFP for good. Uefa is looking like David against Goliath somewhat.

Yea I think now we've signaled we'd go to CAS, and now we've obviously made good on that, we're probably in it for the long haul legally. Seems like this first appeal is focused on due process, and if this fails and assuming we get a CL ban, then we'll appeal the verdict. I don't see UEFA giving up to be honest, they're under so much pressure to enforce FFP that they can't back down. It wouldn't surprise me if they'd be happy with a due process dismissal (as happened with PSG). Then they can hold their hands up and say "we tried" without having to do too much. UEFA are just trying to hold things together at this point, they've long since given up any pretence of being in charge. It's the clubs that are in charge.

Don't see City going for a Super League. We're on the sidelines of that conversation anyway (based on the other set of Der Spiegel leaks) and don't have the clout. I think the Super League is inevitable, and it will be driven by a select group of clubs. But City aren't really in that group (the other clubs would love to exclude us if they can't use FFP to exclude us from the CL).

andyox · Jun 8, 2019

finneh said:
The most idiotic thing about this whole saga is the fact that these blatantly overinflated related party sponsorship deals weren't scrutinised thoroughly in the first place.

A 10 year old with an abacus could have seen that half of City's commercial revenue a couple of years ago was bogus.

Basically the governing body swept it under the carpet, but now are making a big song and dance because they've been shown to be incompetent by a newspaper.

Yea pretty much, they should've given us a CL ban back in 2014, but bottled it. Probably because they feared a legal challenge. In UEFA's defence they were slightly restricted by the definition of related party, so they couldn't re-adjust the Etihad deal like they did for PSG's QIA deal (our punishment did include a condition that we couldn't increase size of the lower tier deals with Aabar and Etisalat). We still failed it massively though.

This is the last chance for UEFA to punish us for FFP because we've comfortably passed it the last few years, so the only option they have is to re-do the 2014 punishment. That's why the pressure is on them. I suppose they could also re-design FFP again, but the trend on FFP re-designs has been to weaken it to help the Italian clubs, so don't really see that that's possible.

finneh · Jun 8, 2019

andyox said:
Yea pretty much, they should've given us a CL ban back in 2014, but bottled it. Probably because they feared a legal challenge. In UEFA's defence they were slightly restricted by the definition of related party, so they couldn't re-adjust the Etihad deal like they did for PSG's QIA deal (our punishment did include a condition that we couldn't increase size of the lower tier deals with Aabar and Etisalat). We still failed it massively though.

This is the last chance for UEFA to punish us for FFP because we've comfortably passed it the last few years, so the only option they have is to re-do the 2014 punishment. That's why the pressure is on them. I suppose they could also re-design FFP again, but the trend on FFP re-designs has been to weaken it to help the Italian clubs, so don't really see that that's possible.

It was a stupid idea anyway... If they wanted to protect clubs from failing they should have regulated to ensure owners put enough capital in to meet their obligations (e.g. if a club was losing £100m a year and every player was on a 5 year deal, £500m would need to be ring fenced).

andyox · Jun 8, 2019

finneh said:
It was a stupid idea anyway... If they wanted to protect clubs from failing they should have regulated to ensure owners put enough capital in to meet their obligations (e.g. if a club was losing £100m a year and every player was on a 5 year deal, £500m would need to be ring fenced).

Yea fully agree on that. The design of it is just a mess, I think mostly because they don't have a clear idea of what problem they're trying to solve (and lots of competing interests trying to influence what it is that they're trying to solve).

Beachryan · Jun 8, 2019

This used to be a favourite topic of mine - moreso with Chelsea and when City first started to spend - so will reiterate my point about City in particular: it distorts the league because of the magnitude of spend. If you look back to the halcyon days of 2000, United had the highest wage bill - c. 50m - but there are about 7 teams all within 15-20% of that.

Initially with Chelsea but even moreso with City, the idea of a league just got blown out of the water. City/Chelsea - and of course United and Liverpool - are now spending 3x as much as the bottom 8 teams on wages. And of course that ignores transfer fees - where City have spent more than anyone else in just about every window for 10 years.

So point 1: this ability to spend outside of means has resulted in an arms race which has left everyone behind - except United and the other sugar-daddy club. Liverpool have been able to compete because of excellent sales. Tottenham because of development and at least some luck (Norwich's Harry Kane becoming that good?!). Before the rise of City and Chelsea wages across the league were still skewed, but not nearly as much. So yes, City have a record point total, but 60% of the time the discrepancy in squad value is more similar to playing a team 2 divisions below them than in the same league.

Point 2: City's scale of spend has numbed everyone to how big it is. From the media, fans and so forth you'd think that United spend similarly to City. Certainly the line peddled is that United have been the big spenders in recent times, and failed. I obviously agree with the second point, but we've been outspent by City by 50% over time, 25% just in the last 5 seasons. To put it another way, the gap between City and United is the same size as that between United and Everton. Few people are arguing that Everton are underachieving because they're not finishing above United.

Point 3: It's not 'investment'. This is my personal bugbear. Investing suggests that City's owners are doing this as it is a capital efficient way to increase their wealth. It absolutely is not. City's owners would have made twice as much if they'd just stuck a billion pounds in a DJI tracker. On any objective level buying a football team is a poor investment, relative to what is available to people in that wealth category. This is simply a plaything. In my opinion it's not really even about 'soft-power' - it's just a group of individuals who by fortune of birth have more money than numerous countries put together, looking for something else to buy. And there's something obscene about that.

andyox · Jun 8, 2019

Beachryan said:
This used to be a favourite topic of mine - moreso with Chelsea and when City first started to spend - so will reiterate my point about City in particular: it distorts the league because of the magnitude of spend. If you look back to the halcyon days of 2000, United had the highest wage bill - c. 50m - but there are about 7 teams all within 15-20% of that.

Initially with Chelsea but even moreso with City, the idea of a league just got blown out of the water. City/Chelsea - and of course United and Liverpool - are now spending 3x as much as the bottom 8 teams on wages. And of course that ignores transfer fees - where City have spent more than anyone else in just about every window for 10 years.

So point 1: this ability to spend outside of means has resulted in an arms race which has left everyone behind - except United and the other sugar-daddy club. Liverpool have been able to compete because of excellent sales. Tottenham because of development and at least some luck (Norwich's Harry Kane becoming that good?!). Before the rise of City and Chelsea wages across the league were still skewed, but not nearly as much. So yes, City have a record point total, but 60% of the time the discrepancy in squad value is more similar to playing a team 2 divisions below them than in the same league.

Point 2: City's scale of spend has numbed everyone to how big it is. From the media, fans and so forth you'd think that United spend similarly to City. Certainly the line peddled is that United have been the big spenders in recent times, and failed. I obviously agree with the second point, but we've been outspent by City by 50% over time, 25% just in the last 5 seasons. To put it another way, the gap between City and United is the same size as that between United and Everton. Few people are arguing that Everton are underachieving because they're not finishing above United.

Point 3: It's not 'investment'. This is my personal bugbear. Investing suggests that City's owners are doing this as it is a capital efficient way to increase their wealth. It absolutely is not. City's owners would have made twice as much if they'd just stuck a billion pounds in a DJI tracker. On any objective level buying a football team is a poor investment, relative to what is available to people in that wealth category. This is simply a plaything. In my opinion it's not really even about 'soft-power' - it's just a group of individuals who by fortune of birth have more money than numerous countries put together, looking for something else to buy. And there's something obscene about that.

On Point 1, what’s the counter-factual? You seem to be implying that the other teams are only spending massively to keep up with what City and Chelsea have spent on transfers/wages. But United’s revenue still dwarfs everyone else’s.

So without City and Chelsea, what would United have done with that revenue if they hadn’t been spending it on transfers/wages to keep up? Paid off the Glazer debt even more quickly? I think the likelihood is that you would still have been spending massively, because you would still need to in order to maintain your competitive position vs. domestic rivals (Liverpool, Arsenal, etc.) and European rivals (Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern, etc.). You can’t afford to get left behind, and you have far more “organic” challengers than “oil money” challengers.

You mention the distortion in the league now in terms of growing inequality between the top teams and the rest. Fully agree. But that’s just a function of the inequality of revenue within the league. Yes City haven’t helped that inequality because we’re now another club for other teams to overcome, but with or without City, United’s revenue would still be 5-6 times the smallest club. That’s a structural issue. So you can ban City from the PL forever, but the league will still be fundamentally skewed and distorted. So who would benefit the most from City disappearing? Probably not teams in the bottom 6 really. It’d definitely benefit United though.

Hughie77 · Jun 8, 2019

Funny how, when it all came out, they had nothing to say! Wow now there going to Arbitration! Why, to try and surpress the stuff that was Hacked from them, that wasn't right to do that, but if there was nothing the hackers found it wouldn't have been made an issue?

Loads of stuff been hacked, and published, players contracts wages, and all this has been by the same people, and those are correct supposedly ?

We wait, and see, but there's a few getting a bit worried it's all correct?

The Cat · Nov 15, 2019

Appeal lost.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50435304

Bubz27 · Nov 15, 2019

It'll be a financial punishment for a club who doesn't really care about finances.

Deery · Nov 15, 2019

A transfer ban would be fun the state their defence is in.

DoomSlayer · Nov 15, 2019

Would Guardiola actually leave if City got a proper transfer ban? He might want to take a break again.

Bobcat · Nov 15, 2019

Bubz27 said:
It'll be a financial punishment for a club who doesn't really care about finances.

Its a joke really. Its like giving fines to rich feckers who constantly drive like maniacs in their sports cars. This whole idea of giving fines for breaching FFP rules is utterly pointless. If they want to make these rules upheld, they have to introduce sanctions that actually hurt

Pexbo · Nov 15, 2019

Bubz27 said:
It'll be a financial punishment for a club who doesn't really care about finances.

Its not a punishment, it’s just a tax on bad behaviour.

Rado_N · Nov 15, 2019

Bobcat said:
Its a joke really. Its like giving fines to rich feckers who constantly drive like maniacs in their sports cars. This whole idea of giving fines for breaching FFP rules is utterly pointless. If they want to make these rules upheld, they have to introduce sanctions that actually hurt

They don’t give a shit about having the rules have an impact, they just want their cut.

Mb194dc · Nov 15, 2019

They'll probably get banned won't they...?

Not sure City fans will be too bothered. Maybe the owners losing out on CL revenue more painful.

Who replaces them in CL if banned?

Bubz27 · Nov 15, 2019

Pexbo said:
Its not a punishment, it’s just a tax on bad behaviour.

A tax on being a bad bitch.

Bubz27 · Nov 15, 2019

Mb194dc said:
They'll probably get banned won't they...?

Not sure City fans will be too bothered. Maybe the owners losing out on CL revenue more painful.

Who replaces them in CL if banned?

All the reports are it'll be a fine.

M18CTID · Nov 15, 2019

The Cat said:
Appeal lost.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50435304

That was the intitial appeal against UEFA reportedly not following their own process and rushing it through in order to beat their own 5 year statute of limitations deadline. CAS are just saying they can't get involved at this stage until such a time as UEFA have made their final decision. There's nothing to see here - in fact, it was being reported months ago that CAS would say this. It begs the question as to why CAS didn't tell City this at the time the appeal was lodged but perhaps they still have to hear the case before making the decision and if there's dozens of other cases up before it then I'm guessing it simply comes down to dealing with them in the order that they're lodged.

None of this affects whatever the final decision will be, and none of it is linked to the reports in The Athletic yesterday that it may be a fine or no punishment at all

M18CTID · Nov 15, 2019

Deery said:
A transfer ban would be fun the state their defence is in.

Just to clear this up, and some of our own fans thought they had the authority to do it too, UEFA don't have the power to impose a transfer ban. Only FIFA can do that, and as this is a UEFA issue FIFA can't get involved

RoyH1 · Nov 15, 2019

Thye'll get fine. Abu Dhabi just has turn on the oil well to max a couple of days and it will be sorted.

ExecutionerWasp001 · Nov 16, 2019

RoyH1 said:
Thye'll get fine. Abu Dhabi just has turn on the oil well to max a couple of days and it will be sorted.

If City accept a fine then they are admitting guilt. Their stance when the allegations were made was that they were totally innocent. They also implied that they would sue UEFA if sanctions were imposed. If UEFA were to impose a fine it would come with caveats. These are bound to include City's accounting being monitored more thoroughly & more often. This would not be accepted by City as it jeopardizes their business model. It's very difficult to see how anyone get's out of this as neither side is looking to compromise.

Fox_Chrys · Nov 16, 2019

If they get banned from CL it could be disastrous, the whole way they got in the elite was spending to get in the CL before FFP became a thing, then with CL revenue, it gave them larger FFP limits as FFP is dependent on revenue.
Take away their CL, then their FFP limits tumble and they will become way less competitive, it will be far worse than something like a transfer ban.

The Irish Connection · Nov 16, 2019

It would be right if they got banned from the champions league, because the world would take notice and not forget soon. If it’s a fine, it will be paid easily and forgotten about in no time.

Sandikan · Nov 16, 2019

Imagine fining a team who are so rich they've been lashing money roughshod over all the rules!

Bulldog United · Nov 16, 2019

The real purpose of FFP seems to be to ensure UEFA gets a hefty dividend every few years on that sweet, sweet oil money now flowing freely throughout the football world.

afc_gentleman · Nov 17, 2019

Fox_Chrys said:
If they get banned from CL it could be disastrous, the whole way they got in the elite was spending to get in the CL before FFP became a thing, then with CL revenue, it gave them larger FFP limits as FFP is dependent on revenue.
Take away their CL, then their FFP limits tumble and they will become way less competitive, it will be far worse than something like a transfer ban.

Exactly. They did the opposite of what we at arsenal did because here we took top4 for granted sigh

Gasolin · Nov 18, 2019

Well one step at a time. Is their any strong confirmation? If so, it would be pretty interesting but unheard of.

ExecutionerWasp001 · Nov 18, 2019

Bulldog United said:
The real purpose of FFP seems to be to ensure UEFA gets a hefty dividend every few years on that sweet, sweet oil money now flowing freely throughout the football world.

UEFA have tried to play both sides & get paid at both ends. The Super Clubs have complained about rich oligarch's & state funded clubs gatecrashing the CL. To appease us they created FFP. They had though, no intention to enforce FFP in it's strictest sense. In the case of City they were allowed to choose their own punishment, where they chose a fine of a few Million. UEFA told the Super Clubs that they were taking action against transgressors whilst also pocketing a few million off City. City could pay the fine & then go on to business as usual.

At the time the arrangement was acceptable to all parties. The problem was that if rules can be broken without punishment there is nothing to stop transgressors from repeatedly crossing the line. This resulted in PSG taking Neymar from Barca & City appointing Pep & going on a huge spending spree.

UEFA is corrupt to the core & should be abolished. In my view what is sadly likely to happen is the creation of a European Super League under a new body. PSG & City will go on to dominate their respective domestic leagues. PSG already do this but City will end up doing it too as clubs like Utd & Liverpool won't be in the league to challenge.

antihenry · Jan 23, 2020

Revealed: the scale of Manchester City’s FFP breaches before 2014 Uefa deal
• Accounting rejected and £118.75m of sponsorships questioned
• City could face Champions League ban in second Uefa inquiry
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...accounting-sponsorships-uefa-champions-league

FireballXL5 · Jan 23, 2020

Of course, nothing will happen.

YNWAManUnited · Jan 23, 2020

The race for fifth would become alot more intestering if it's for Man Citys Champions League spot!

Paul_Scholes18 · Jan 23, 2020

Even if 8 CL spots opened up tomorrow I would bet on us to end in 9th with Ole

RoyH1 · Jan 23, 2020

FireballXL5 said:
Of course, nothing will happen.

This. UEFA had done absolutely nothing with oil states pumping money into their PR projects and they're not going to begin now.

Manchester City risk of getting CL banned

New Member

Full Member

New Member

New Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

More helpful with spreadsheets than Phurry

Full Member

Full Member

Will drink milk from your hands

No I won’t change your tag line

Dreary

New Member

Full Member

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.

Yaaas Broncos!

Full Member

No I won’t change your tag line

No I won’t change your tag line

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

Full Member

aka sex on the beach

New Member

New Member

Full Member

Full Member

CAF GRU Rep

Full Member

New Member

Full Member

Full Member