Reading this thread just makes the hurt about 18/19 worse. Imagine in this day and age a team from a small league winning the CL and with amazing football as well, half the team home grown. So close.
Are there any City fans that accept it’s tainted?
- Thread starter OldSchoolManc
- Start date
Lots of this just comes across as fans being upset that they are no longer top dog to be honest.
I agree that it is unfair how disproportionate City's spending potential is to the rest of the league, but it doesn't make any real difference to smaller clubs that City (and probably Newcastle in future) are now financially bullying the league as opposed to United and Chelsea.
I doubt City fans really care and are probably enjoying this period of competing, seeing great football and some of the best footballers on the planer wear their shirt.
Hopefully putting the nose of a few of the big clubs out of joint will lead to reformation of the rules because at the moment FFP is a joke and limits anyone other than big teams from properly competing.
Football is rotten when it comes to money and it's not a level field for competing at all.
I agree that it is unfair how disproportionate City's spending potential is to the rest of the league, but it doesn't make any real difference to smaller clubs that City (and probably Newcastle in future) are now financially bullying the league as opposed to United and Chelsea.
I doubt City fans really care and are probably enjoying this period of competing, seeing great football and some of the best footballers on the planer wear their shirt.
Hopefully putting the nose of a few of the big clubs out of joint will lead to reformation of the rules because at the moment FFP is a joke and limits anyone other than big teams from properly competing.
Football is rotten when it comes to money and it's not a level field for competing at all.
While Im not rooting for Qatar, its not about who owns the club. Its about them pumping cash into the club underhandly, to make their finances look better and therefore have more funds to spend under FFP. Which has allowed them to grow quicker and less organically. Thats what the charges are about, not who owes them, but how they are putting money into the club under the guise of 'fake' sponsors amounts
If Qatar bought United, and were then found to be doing the same thing, then yes any trophy we win would be tainted as well.
Nobody knows what City have spent, hence why there are so many charges. If the PL turns round as says 'we were wrong, it is all legit' you can make that argument but currently the whole point is they think they've hidden vast amounts of spending.
I actually disagree re Pep - I think people have forgotten just how much spending power he was given early on and, assuming the next manager comes in and gets similar, I don't see any difference in their ability to win.
That's a lovely fairy tale. In reality, "organic growth" in modern football works something like this: invest the money you generate back into the club, try to make more right decisions than wrong ones, overachieve with your shrewd signings, and then watch your team getting systematically picked apart by the elite clubs so you're back to square one.
City obviously have recruited the best directors, scouts etc. and as you say the best manager and then players. Simply spending on transfers far from guarantees success as we know too well. The issue is - why are they all at Man City? Because they were plucked from obscurity and bankrolled by a Middle Eastern state, breaking FFP rules to do it. It’s beyond tainted - it’s total doping.
It's a hard thought line to follow, if this win is tainted, most wins are tainted.
As a FC Barcelona fan, it's fair to recognize that the club had a great push even from the day of its creation, with a bunch of wealthy businessmen getting together to fund the club, helping with their personal wealth and contacts in many milestones at the start of the sport in Spain, while other teams had to share pitch and shirts.
For city, is yet again a group of wealthy owners (who also own a state) putting money and contacts into the club.
The difference is that now there were supposed to be laws to prevent this from happening, still, those laws never leveled the field for clubs created before FFP, and who profited from wealthy owners building their history in the 100 years before the laws were created.
How much time needs a club to rake in the profit of a scandal before their trophies are fair again? Atletico de Madrid were to be relegated in the last La Liga season before the Spanish Civil war, they were merged with the Air Force team that couldn't compete by their own right at the top tier in the war/post-war, they managed to secure their spot because Real Oviedo's pitch was unusable (was employed as an arsenal for the military) and couldn't play, to make things even better, Atletico de Madrid, who shouldn't be in the top tier, and was merged with a military club in a dictatorship, won the first two titles after the competition was restarted post-war.
It's even worse than the City situation, so what do we do with them, are their titles still tainted? Where was the point they returned to be 'legit' again? Where would they be today if they didn't get help to bounce back, would they even exist?
As a FC Barcelona fan, it's fair to recognize that the club had a great push even from the day of its creation, with a bunch of wealthy businessmen getting together to fund the club, helping with their personal wealth and contacts in many milestones at the start of the sport in Spain, while other teams had to share pitch and shirts.
For city, is yet again a group of wealthy owners (who also own a state) putting money and contacts into the club.
The difference is that now there were supposed to be laws to prevent this from happening, still, those laws never leveled the field for clubs created before FFP, and who profited from wealthy owners building their history in the 100 years before the laws were created.
How much time needs a club to rake in the profit of a scandal before their trophies are fair again? Atletico de Madrid were to be relegated in the last La Liga season before the Spanish Civil war, they were merged with the Air Force team that couldn't compete by their own right at the top tier in the war/post-war, they managed to secure their spot because Real Oviedo's pitch was unusable (was employed as an arsenal for the military) and couldn't play, to make things even better, Atletico de Madrid, who shouldn't be in the top tier, and was merged with a military club in a dictatorship, won the first two titles after the competition was restarted post-war.
It's even worse than the City situation, so what do we do with them, are their titles still tainted? Where was the point they returned to be 'legit' again? Where would they be today if they didn't get help to bounce back, would they even exist?
Of course it makes a difference to the smaller clubs. Without City and Newcastle taking up top 4 spots then Brighton would have qualified for the CL this season and in the past decade Everton would have qualified once, Spurs an extra couple of times and Leicester would have had two more appearances in the competition. Leicester were relegated after not spending a penny last summer, don't you think they would have been able to spend a bit more if they had the CL money for a couple of seasons.
I don't know why you added Chelsea either, they were just as bad as Newcastle and City. As soon as Ferguson retired the league would have been super competitive anyway and it didn't really need a team like City to outspend everyone to make it so.
I imagine that would be tough for a Barca fan but f it makes you feel any better Barca's achievements are tainted for numerous reasons, irrespective of whether or not City's are as well.
Doping and paying off refs isn't a good look no matter which way you look at it
But do you think Brighton fans (as per your example) are any more annoyed at City/Newcastle than they are at Utd/Arsenal for outspending them?
It feels like you are asking fans of smaller teams to happily accept clubs like Utd being permanently (and it IS permanent, it will never, ever change) richer, but to resent the nouveau riche. And I don’t see why they would think in those terms. You are framing it in a very particular way because you are a Utd fan, I think.
I just can't bring myself to care. Other teams have spent similar amounts and haven't achieved what we've achieved.
At the end of the day many of these rules were erected as barriers to prevent smaller clubs like City from ever competing.
The motivations were never to protect clubs from financial ruin, it was a cartel move and I simply don't respect it.
At the end of the day many of these rules were erected as barriers to prevent smaller clubs like City from ever competing.
The motivations were never to protect clubs from financial ruin, it was a cartel move and I simply don't respect it.
Sport only exists because of its rules. If you break them, then you are cheating. It's pretty simple!
The cartel is City. Spending off the books, Mancini with his UAE wage/ pay off. Peps brother being both a football club etc. Your argument doesn't make any sense when City are the cartel. Funnily enough, that's why I don't respect them. The real Manchester City with its proper history died in 2008, this new form is purely a corrupt franchise of the UAE.
It doesn't matter if you agree with the FFP rules, your club is signed up to the rules to play in the Premier league so should abide by them. If you're worried about smaller clubs being able to compete how can they compete with City when they're cheating?
I can't stop supporting United ecen if Quatar buys the club. But I'm able to flag my concerns. I understand that the game is tainted already, and I understand the problem with owners that won't spend and just use us as a wallet. The club should be able to use the income on the ckub and not to buy a new mansion and diamond tiaras for Glazers kids. In my head there is conflicting thoughts about this, I don't like it but I don't see another option after the current ownership.
Has there ever been another situation where the club had to pay for its own acquisition?
Has there ever been another situation where the club had to pay for its own acquisition?
Yes I agree, I just don't agree that United, Chelsea, and Liverpool can't compete. Even Arsenal have shown something
Did you read the OP? The thread is about whether it's tainted by the cheating.
I'm a bit confused by people's inability to make a distinction between being owned by a rich person or person(s) and financial doping.
Financial doping is a breaking of the rules either by using money or gaining money by illicit means.
Just because a club is owned by a billionaire or state doesn't mean they are financially doping. Madrid, are one of the richest clubs on the planet and state owned but they do not "financially dope". They are not one in the same.
E.g saying "soon united will be finanically doping" isn't true. City broke the rules using money and fake sponorships/secret wages and god knows what else to get ahead of everyone else - That is financial doping. United being owned by a state, as much as it might be morally distasteful - isn't in itself financial doping. Newcastle as far as i'm away are not breaking any rules and have a reasonable transfer budget next year to comply with FFP. E.g they are not looking to sign mbappe and neymar and whoever else.
Financial doping is a breaking of the rules either by using money or gaining money by illicit means.
Just because a club is owned by a billionaire or state doesn't mean they are financially doping. Madrid, are one of the richest clubs on the planet and state owned but they do not "financially dope". They are not one in the same.
E.g saying "soon united will be finanically doping" isn't true. City broke the rules using money and fake sponorships/secret wages and god knows what else to get ahead of everyone else - That is financial doping. United being owned by a state, as much as it might be morally distasteful - isn't in itself financial doping. Newcastle as far as i'm away are not breaking any rules and have a reasonable transfer budget next year to comply with FFP. E.g they are not looking to sign mbappe and neymar and whoever else.
They all know in the back of their minds they are cheats.
I have to laugh at the pathetic mental gymnastics our fans are performing to justify wanting to be bought by Qatar.
We will be the next PSG. In case you don‘t know, they are running record losses and hit a dead end. They are shackled, now they want United to be their next project.
If they succeed, they will cheat, buy stars without thought of team building, Ten Hag will quit or get fired.
And our pathetic fans are fine with it because they want to be top dog again.
I have to laugh at the pathetic mental gymnastics our fans are performing to justify wanting to be bought by Qatar.
We will be the next PSG. In case you don‘t know, they are running record losses and hit a dead end. They are shackled, now they want United to be their next project.
If they succeed, they will cheat, buy stars without thought of team building, Ten Hag will quit or get fired.
And our pathetic fans are fine with it because they want to be top dog again.
Why would someone like Brighton be annoyed at City spending a half a billion rather than United? At the end of the day both teams have an unfair advantage financially and it makes no difference to Brighton. If it wasn't City it would be a more traditionally big club taking up the space.
It's even funnier because even if they got in the top 4 all the big clubs would pillage them for their best players and probably leave them in a worse position in the long run (you can see this now with how McAllister has gone to Liverpool and many on this forum now want Caicedo & Ferguson)
I dislike it. But I can’t say it would taint any trophies.
The horse has already bolted on that side of things unfortunately. Twice in fact. Meanwhile our horse was being amputated by the glazers
Where does our money come from
And how did we get into that position? Do we have 115 breaches against us? Have we ever?
City fans would accept a Manager that has been banned for filing TWO drugs tests if it helped them win. Oh, wait a minute, they do have a manager that has failed TWO drugs tests when he was a player and he got a suspended prison sentence. It was rescinded nine years later when he was famous and the Barcelona manager during the time Barcelona were allegedly paying Referees. No medical evidence was offered as far as I can find, just a request to rescind the ban. Then there was the doctor at Bayern that Guardiola got sacked because Thiago injury had not healed after four weeks 'as it would in Spain'. The doc recommended seven weeks, but Guardiola played Thiago and he was injured again. Smoke and fire.
Also, should the Inland Revenue be looking City's accounts too for the period UEFA found them guilty of lying about revenue and dodgy payments? City fans are blind and on the whole, stupid if they think they can get away with it for a third time by hiring top lawyers to delay and delay again. I believe the Revenue should investigate the players salaries from that period too. This is the time of year Yaya would have been 'looking for another challenge' until a barrow full of cash turned up and he stayed. Mancini on two salaries, under the table payment requests to Napoli when City tried to sign Cavani and so it goes on.
United could buy the best players because of the worldwide fanbase producing millions in real revenue. I recognise it's hard to generate that much from a few thousand fans in Stockport. If the City fans don't like the rules, don't enter the competition. Now they have bought a treble, do any of them think the owner maight show up for a second time in 15 years?
Also, should the Inland Revenue be looking City's accounts too for the period UEFA found them guilty of lying about revenue and dodgy payments? City fans are blind and on the whole, stupid if they think they can get away with it for a third time by hiring top lawyers to delay and delay again. I believe the Revenue should investigate the players salaries from that period too. This is the time of year Yaya would have been 'looking for another challenge' until a barrow full of cash turned up and he stayed. Mancini on two salaries, under the table payment requests to Napoli when City tried to sign Cavani and so it goes on.
United could buy the best players because of the worldwide fanbase producing millions in real revenue. I recognise it's hard to generate that much from a few thousand fans in Stockport. If the City fans don't like the rules, don't enter the competition. Now they have bought a treble, do any of them think the owner maight show up for a second time in 15 years?
Last edited:
It doesn't really matter, nor is it relevant, that Brighton fans are more annoyed by one than the other. If they're not able to look at the playing field, and understanding that City have broken rules to get where they get, then they have a blinkered view of the sport. Which is fine, but it's not an argument that had any sort of relevance.
The amount spent by big clubs is what it is whoever does it, be it United City, Chelsea etc it happens in all professional team sports from football to F1 - but cheating and breaking financial rules is completely different and should be severely punished if proven.
Quite honestly, I'm having more and more trouble buying into that perspective.
If they've broken FFP rules, then there should be consequences, fair and square. The rules are there for many good reasons other than preventing clubs like City from doing what they may have been doing. But the underlying moral narrative - that all of it is not just against the rules, but somehow a complete overturning of the moral basis of competition among clubs? Not so sure about that. If you're not already a big club, there's really no way of becoming one without investing really, really heavily - and that is simply impossible to fund through your own revenue, if you start out from a low point. There's a legitimate point involved in that limitless spending drives up costs for everyone and makes it much more difficult for most teams to compete - but that results equally from high-spending clubs who are using their own revenue (such as us). If that's what you're after, then a spending cap of some sort would make more sense. As it is, you can spend it if you have it, but only as long you've earned it in certain ways and not in others. It's hard not to see some merit in the view that this essentially just protects the position of the established big clubs, much more than it serves the purpose of promoting a competitive environment. Then there's the issue of securing economic viability in clubs, but you'd imagine that could be done in other ways as well. As long as clubs don't overspend by taking on debt (against which regulations are, if anything, much too weak - to say nothing of the fact that leveraged takeovers are even allowed), owner investment surely does not threaten that?
There's another thing too - you can't really argue any more that it's all down to the money. They've done far too good a job with far too many things for that to be true. Yes, the money is a necessary precondition, but it's not a sufficient cause to explain the result. Just look at what PSG has achieved with even more money. They've not just built a great team, but an absolutely first class organisation in every aspect - from medical dept to manager. One can hardly bear to think about it. I try to stick to the thought of how great it's going to be when (if) we bring that dynasty down.
I'm wondering how anticlimactic it's been for a lot of them, a treble no less and it feels like a tick in a box? Not seen a City shirt in the parks or shops in Stockport yet. I didn't watch the match and avoided any media but then thought no doubt I'd hear some car horns or people singing down the street, I thought they'd lost on pens to Inter on Saturday night it was so quiet.
The simple answer is no. Living in Manchester surrounded by City fans, family and at work they completely dismiss any financial doping.
They honestly believe that they are a self funded club and that the rest of the teams are out to get them. All of them think the 115 is fabrication and that City will sue the Premiership for damaging their image.
After years in the wilderness and yo-yoing through the divisions they really don’t care how the success is brought (bought), they were sick and tired seeing United boss everything.
I have raised this issue on several occasions and was met each time with the same old rhetoric of us being bitter and jealous of their success.
All in all 70 years of being in United’s shadow have made Abu Dhabi FC fans paranoid, deluded and downright ignorant.
They honestly believe that they are a self funded club and that the rest of the teams are out to get them. All of them think the 115 is fabrication and that City will sue the Premiership for damaging their image.
After years in the wilderness and yo-yoing through the divisions they really don’t care how the success is brought (bought), they were sick and tired seeing United boss everything.
I have raised this issue on several occasions and was met each time with the same old rhetoric of us being bitter and jealous of their success.
All in all 70 years of being in United’s shadow have made Abu Dhabi FC fans paranoid, deluded and downright ignorant.
It really makes me think that if severe punishments ARE handed out, it’ll be blamed on everyone else and called a witch-hunt.
They really should blame the owners, management and anyone else that knows they were breaking all those rules. There’s no way Pep is completely ignorant or blameless.
I doubt anything severe is happening. They're not going to undermine the results of the treble or the last decade. You either come out and stop it early and prevent 10 years worthlessness or take the money and investment. The Premier league and UK are too intertwined with the middle east states to do anything and the damage has been done, any pretense is gone with Saudi Arabia buying Newcastle. It's going to be an oil state shoot out with the new infrastructure that comes with it. Maybe at best they can be seen to tighten some aspects to keep these states in balance.
Last edited:
Hopefully when they sing Champions of Whatever next season the opposition fans reply with Cheats, Cheats, Cheats!
One or two.
I personally know a couple of City fans who stopped taking an active interest post Mansour.
Most Mancester based City fans I know, though, are mainly fueled by a hatred for United. As they were before Mansour. They may or may not acknowledge the cheating/tainted part objectively (as in: recognizing financial doping, inflated sponsorships and such), but they don't care: it's seen as a means to an end, in their minds it's justified even if it's illegal according to the letter of the law.
As for the global fan base (whatever that actually amounts to in numbers), obviously not.
I personally know a couple of City fans who stopped taking an active interest post Mansour.
Most Mancester based City fans I know, though, are mainly fueled by a hatred for United. As they were before Mansour. They may or may not acknowledge the cheating/tainted part objectively (as in: recognizing financial doping, inflated sponsorships and such), but they don't care: it's seen as a means to an end, in their minds it's justified even if it's illegal according to the letter of the law.
As for the global fan base (whatever that actually amounts to in numbers), obviously not.
Spot on. The ignorance on this thread is unreal. Focusing on spending a lot of money which a lot of clubs do, rather than a systematic state led operation to ignore all rules and actually fake sources of funds and the actual amount spent.
Someone said it very well earlier. We don't actually know how much City have spent, as the true numbers are hidden!
I think it's the sheer ignorance and not caring from a huge amount of fans which is why this hasn't come to anything until now.
Arsenal fans are starting to get it, which surprises me as you'd have thought constantly being pillaged by City at the start would have done it.
My experience too, including my mother and some very close friends, outwardly at least.
But they're really lovely people so I do think they must care on some level on the HR abuse side of things. Had a few people acknowledge that its grim but say they were fans before the take over and its part of their lives. This is fair enough but I do wonder whether their ability to look the other way would be as strong if they hadn't lived in our shadow for so long. Curious about this for our fan base too. Would people be as eager for a Qatari takeover if it was say, Villa, who had just won the treble/had City's recent past (takeover etc)?
Last edited:
I live in Stockport and they’re everywhere. I mostly don’t engage, but there’s one city fan who has all all but given up. He still watches the games occasionally, but can’t get past the corruption. He’s kinda old school and now seeing his own club’s rule breaking in order to achieve success has left him feeling a bit cheated.
I’m not sure there are many others like him…
I’m not sure there are many others like him…
This.
On a related note, I take any transfer fee that City say they've paid for so-and-so players with a pinch of salt. Haaland for 60m? Nah, I'm sure they paid out more than that unofficially. The wages they pay their players? Pretty sure there's more than meets the eye on that. Mancini was being paid by two different clubs, one being City and the other some club in Abu Dhabi. What about those charges that the PL made that have gone quiet?
Their financial doping are only being seriously discussed on lesser known internet forums like these, and even here we see that there are people who don't really care what they've done because they've stucked it to the "establishment" clubs like ourselves, Liverpool and Arsenal. The fact that the British media are out there lauding their "achievements" is proof they've won. They've legitimized their crooked club. There is even a sickening tone of how the "plucky underdog club" who were in the third division in the late 90s have come so far thanks to Qatari "investment".
That’s funny because the minute they secured their first taste of European football they immediately pivoted over to trying to bully an innocent midtable club into selling them an academy player we’ve worked so hard to develop into the top tier talent he is, despite being told repeatedly he isn’t for sale
AC Milan did the same thing didn’t they? Even more successful one could argue as they hoovered up European Cups for fun.
They were utter garbage before the takeover in the 80’s. Average club.
Some might still argue they still are average it’s only rose tinted glasses apparently they are ok and City are the bad guys.
AC Milan was in a very poor state when Berlusconi bought it, but only Juventus had more Serie A titles than them, historically they were battling with Inter to be the second biggest club in Italy, but mismanagement did them dirty and almost bankrupted them.
City was nowhere near to be considered big in England until the takeover happened, to the point that many people outside the british isles only knew about their existence when Abu Dhabi bought them, before that Manchester was associated exclusively with United.
Berlusconi certainly saved Milan from bankruptcy, but he was buying a big club that was considered the second biggest in Italy just behind Juventus. City was a minuscule club that players outside of the british isles didn't know.
Of course they don't and won't care (the vast majority of them).
The fact that "other teams including your very own United have spent similar amounts" is thrown about all day long,
tells you that they don't consider themselves to be cheats. Only rich.
And being rich is fine because the FFP was designed to stop smaller clubs from ever becoming big (this is true in and of itself).
If City fans manage to ignore the blatant cheating, which they seem to do rather successfully,
then of course threads like this one will be seen as incredibly bitter in their eyes.
This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.
They view themselves as equivalent to Abramovich and Chelsea.
The fact that "other teams including your very own United have spent similar amounts" is thrown about all day long,
tells you that they don't consider themselves to be cheats. Only rich.
And being rich is fine because the FFP was designed to stop smaller clubs from ever becoming big (this is true in and of itself).
If City fans manage to ignore the blatant cheating, which they seem to do rather successfully,
then of course threads like this one will be seen as incredibly bitter in their eyes.
This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.
They view themselves as equivalent to Abramovich and Chelsea.