ti vu
Full Member
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2015
- Messages
- 12,799
And you did nothing.edit
Now join in to vindicate yourself.
Not that I complain about the latter.
And you did nothing.edit
Probably. Khashoggi them.What are they going to do? Put out a hit on them?!
What is this?I thought that was related to our number of loanees not money.
And probably also conveniently chaired by Arsenal members maybe?
What bothers me about all of this pseudo indignation is the fact that we aren’t talking about City outspending United and other teams.
United fans and others are Indignant they were allowed to spend essentially the same amount as them.
Gross spend over the last decade (not net, so sponsors, etc not an issue) … United 1.3 billion, City 1.4 billion.
So in essence the argument is: you can’t spend as much as us to have success and earn fans because you don’t already have the same number of fans….
None of it really seems open market and competitively fair.
And it seems more like an attempt to mollify and artificially manipulate things for Madrid, Barca, and La Liga after the Superleague trials went against them more than anything else.
The Premiere league teams can match spending and, frankly, play on the field. This is an attack on the Premiere League, driven by historic leagues and teams that understand they are falling irreparably behind, and the parties involved need to understand that.
Mostly, because artificial means for “punishing” investment simply don’t work in the long run. They need to worry about why people don’t want to invest there. Maybe they used fake fronts to send in money, but they could have done the same thing to buy and dominate with Real Betis ir someone like that …. and chose not to do so. It’s still investment. People want to invest in the PL, and NOT in other leagues… and UEFA is trying to artificially stop that from happening.
You are basically saying it is Qatar/UEFA attacking their cousins Abu Dhabi/PL, all after having destroyed Agnelli/SuperLeague first hand? A bit convoluted, really. Much more likely and as suggested by other posters, it is just an internal UK thing with the FA timely offering City on a plate to prevent the Gov’s independent committee going too deep into a number of other owners.And it seems more like an attempt to mollify and artificially manipulate things for Madrid, Barca, and La Liga after the Superleague trials went against them more than anything else.
The Premiere league teams can match spending and, frankly, play on the field. This is an attack on the Premiere League, driven by historic leagues and teams that understand they are falling irreparably behind, and the parties involved need to understand that.
City Football Group also owns Man City, right? You really think this small technicality means there is no wrongdoing? They may as well rebrand every club they own to UAE FC because that is what they are.Manchester City didn't purchase the club, wtf are you on about?
City Football Group purchased 44% of the club... Pere Guardiola purchased another 44%.
He looks like Ciro Di Marzio.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
he didn't say "no"
You’re part right, but key word in the first paragraph is ‘independent’.In an arbitration case, as one of the parties you are entitled to nominate an independent arbiter. That's how it works.
That's a completely different process to the appointment of an independent commission, of which City will have zero influence over its composition.
Foden’s barber. You’ve seen his hair, must a dodgy fecker.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
REALLY should have bought him that birthday cake.Apparently Yaya Toure and his agent have been key witnesses for the PL regarding dodgy payments etc
what a circus
A good ol’ non-denial denial.He looks like Ciro Di Marzio.
Hardly, but what illegal about it. CFG didn't buy Girona. They bought 44%, Pere Guardiola bought a different 44%, its no different to our shares in Yokohama, Siuchan or Palermo. CFG go around hoovering up feeder clubs. Its not against the rules. Doing so with someone you know or have worked with is nothing new.City Football Group also owns Man City, right? You really think this small technicality means there is no wrongdoing? They may as well rebrand every club they own to UAE FC because that is what they are.
You really believe it is purely by chance that both entities invested into buying the club at the same time Pep manages City?
Expulsion from the league for systemic cheating going on for over a decade isn’t just possible , it’s probable.The more you think about it, the only actual punishment they can do is strip them of the titles, isn't it? Relegation maybe yes maybe no, points deduction maybe, but you would 100% have to strip them of the titles won "if they cheated the years they won the title". Obviously they did. But if they are able to prove it, how the feck could they not strip them of those titles?
You miss the point.I thought that was related to our number of loanees not money.
And probably also conveniently chaired by Arsenal members maybe?
What bothers me about all of this pseudo indignation is the fact that we aren’t talking about City outspending United and other teams.
United fans and others are Indignant they were allowed to spend essentially the same amount as them.
Gross spend over the last decade (not net, so sponsors, etc not an issue) … United 1.3 billion, City 1.4 billion.
So in essence the argument is: you can’t spend as much as us to have success and earn fans because you don’t already have the same number of fans….
None of it really seems open market and competitively fair.
And it seems more like an attempt to mollify and artificially manipulate things for Madrid, Barca, and La Liga after the Superleague trials went against them more than anything else.
The Premiere league teams can match spending and, frankly, play on the field. This is an attack on the Premiere League, driven by historic leagues and teams that understand they are falling irreparably behind, and the parties involved need to understand that.
Mostly, because artificial means for “punishing” investment simply don’t work in the long run. They need to worry about why people don’t want to invest there. Maybe they used fake fronts to send in money, but they could have done the same thing to buy and dominate with Real Betis ir someone like that …. and chose not to do so. It’s still investment. People want to invest in the PL, and NOT in other leagues… and UEFA is trying to artificially stop that from happening.
Will be fun to have players like Agüero and David Silva in the inbox chime in on which profile from Barrow AFC to be wary of.Oh well, we might be fun to manage in FM again after all this
One step away from "this is a European attack on The Crown"I thought that was related to our number of loanees not money.
And probably also conveniently chaired by Arsenal members maybe?
What bothers me about all of this pseudo indignation is the fact that we aren’t talking about City outspending United and other teams.
United fans and others are Indignant they were allowed to spend essentially the same amount as them.
Gross spend over the last decade (not net, so sponsors, etc not an issue) … United 1.3 billion, City 1.4 billion.
So in essence the argument is: you can’t spend as much as us to have success and earn fans because you don’t already have the same number of fans….
None of it really seems open market and competitively fair.
And it seems more like an attempt to mollify and artificially manipulate things for Madrid, Barca, and La Liga after the Superleague trials went against them more than anything else.
The Premiere league teams can match spending and, frankly, play on the field. This is an attack on the Premiere League, driven by historic leagues and teams that understand they are falling irreparably behind, and the parties involved need to understand that.
Mostly, because artificial means for “punishing” investment simply don’t work in the long run. They need to worry about why people don’t want to invest there. Maybe they used fake fronts to send in money, but they could have done the same thing to buy and dominate with Real Betis ir someone like that …. and chose not to do so. It’s still investment. People want to invest in the PL, and NOT in other leagues… and UEFA is trying to artificially stop that from happening.
And mostly nothing will come out of itThat doesn't make sense given it's the PL that are making the charges
PL was the biggest league in the world pre-City and will be still post-City (if City as we currently are get the boot)And mostly nothing will come out of it
Pure circus.
PL need City to be a super league, one less rich team fighting for the league makes the league least interesting.
You’ve got it backwards. The reason transfer outlay has ballooned is because clubs who are expected to balance their books are being forced to compete with teams who theoretically can’t go bankrupt, and as such you’ve got teams who’ve earned their money over decades like Barca actively destroying themselves to beat out the likes of City & PSG, and even financial titans like United bargain shopping for Burnley strikers because they’ve had to spend so much to catch up…. The reason United have spent as much as City IS a product of their financial doping. Not the other way around.What bothers me about all of this pseudo indignation is the fact that we aren’t talking about City outspending United and other teams.
United fans and others are Indignant they were allowed to spend essentially the same amount as them.
Gross spend over the last decade (not net, so sponsors, etc not an issue) … United 1.3 billion, City 1.4 billion.
So in essence the argument is: you can’t spend as much as us to have success and earn fans because you don’t already have the same number of fans….
None of it really seems open market and competitively fair.
It’s REBEKAH VARDY.
PL already allowed nations to buy clubs in their league.Stripped of titles is what should happen, really, but it's fantasy. These dickheads will do nothing. This entire procedure will prove what a scum league the PL really is.
Teams like us, and yes, even the scouse cnuts were robbed off hard fought premiership titles due to a cheating scum club.
Actually, if they let them get away without any SEVERE punishment the PL might be the scummiest league in the world no exaggeration..
HilariousI don’t think it’s appropriate that we discuss this until a further statement is made
Barca had competition for Coutinho, Dembele, Griezmann? City didn't break £100m till Grealish. Barca spent that years previously.You’ve got it backwards. The reason transfer outlay has ballooned is because clubs who are expected to balance their books are being forced to compete with teams who theoretically can’t go bankrupt, and as such you’ve got teams who’ve earned their money over decades like Barca actively destroying themselves to beat out the likes of City & PSG, and even financial titans like United bargain shopping for Burnley strikers because they’ve had to spend so much to catch up…. The reason United have spent as much as City IS a product of their financial doping. Not the other way around.
Not to mention that if a lot of these allegations are true, City have been paying people off the books, and therefore spending a lot more than is on the official record..
Also, it’s sport, not ‘the open market’ …A department store doesnt get accused of financial doping when a billionaire ploughs loads of money into it, but a sports club in a league with a notion of fair sporting competition might.
Top post.You’ve got it backwards. The reason transfer outlay has ballooned is because clubs who are expected to balance their books are being forced to compete with teams who theoretically can’t go bankrupt, and as such you’ve got teams who’ve earned their money over decades like Barca actively destroying themselves to beat out the likes of City & PSG, and even financial titans like United bargain shopping for Burnley strikers because they’ve had to spend so much to catch up…. The reason United have spent as much as City IS a product of their financial doping. Not the other way around.
Not to mention that if a lot of these allegations are true, City have been paying people off the books, and therefore spending a lot more than is on the official record… that’s kinda the whole point!
Also, it’s sport, not ‘the open market’ …A department store might not get accused of financial doping when a billionaire ploughs loads of money into it, but a sports club in a league with a notion of fair sporting competition might.
You still miss the point it seemsBarca had competition for Coutinho, Dembele, Griezmann? City didn't break £100m till Grealish. Barca spent that years previously.
We can be found guilty of cheating or whatever and should take full responsibility but we're in no way responsible for the level of idiocy that went on at Camp Nou.
Barcelona had 3 x £100m+ players when Cities transfer record was still £65m. In fact 2 players who cost nearly double Cities most expensive signing.
We might be going down for alot of shit we deserve but we most certainly aren't responsible for the state of Barca or United, spunking huge money on the likes of Maguire, Pogba and Coutinho. Harry Maguire for £80m is a bigger crime than the hundred+ we've committed combined.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Isn't it just revealing that instead of pleading their innocence, these shameless motherfeckers want to 'find' the mole.What are they going to do? Put out a hit on them?!
Serie A were top dogs and never really recovered after calciopoli. The charges are in a slightly different category, but I think you are right that this will have lasting effects on football in the UK. If cheating is proven in court, the scrutiny on the rest of the league will be hugeIt’s quite sad what’s happened to football. All seemed inevitable when the Premier League exploded in popularity, and as obscene money became the norm, something like this was only a matter of time.
If the charges stick, it will be a devastating indictment of the way football in the UK has been handled. Wider questions of the Premier League and governing bodies also need to be raised.
Is there a punishment that will do justice to matchgoing supporters? How much have individuals spent on season tickets for the best part of a decade, only to now find they were potentially watching a rigged tournament where certain team(s) simply weren’t playing fair?
Same goes for the athletes, who worked so hard to get to the pinnacle of the sport, only to now find the bulk of their careers could be nil and void.
Corruption in football has always been a talking point, particularly when World Cups come around, but the realisation of it unfolding in front of our eyes right on our door step really brings it home.
I mean, your not responsible for the dumb decisions we've made but our mistakes being so expensive is at least partly down to you. I guess Chelsea are probably more guilty of inflating the market but then you're citing numbers that seem to be made up, so who knows?Barca had competition for Coutinho, Dembele, Griezmann? City didn't break £100m till Grealish. Barca spent that years previously.
We can be found guilty of cheating or whatever and should take full responsibility but we're in no way responsible for the level of idiocy that went on at Camp Nou.
Barcelona had 3 x £100m+ players when Cities transfer record was still £65m. In fact 2 players who cost nearly double Cities most expensive signing.
We might be going down for alot of shit we deserve but we most certainly aren't responsible for the state of Barca or United, spunking huge money on the likes of Maguire, Pogba and Coutinho. Harry Maguire for £80m is a bigger crime than the hundred+ we've committed combined.
No I don't. Barca could have bought players far less than they did, so could United etc... City have broken the rules and spent gratuitously but no one at City made United spunk a billion pound in that time period on poor players. The idea that Pogba going to United for £80m+ is anything to do with Cities spending is ridiculous.You still miss the point it seems
There's merit in both arguments. I think the incumbents definitely needed greater investment to keep up with the likes of City and PSG.Barca had competition for Coutinho, Dembele, Griezmann? City didn't break £100m till Grealish. Barca spent that years previously.
We can be found guilty of cheating or whatever and should take full responsibility but we're in no way responsible for the level of idiocy that went on at Camp Nou.
Barcelona had 3 x £100m+ players when Cities transfer record was still £65m. In fact 2 players who cost nearly double Cities most expensive signing.
We might be going down for alot of shit we deserve but we most certainly aren't responsible for the state of Barca or United, spunking huge money on the likes of Maguire, Pogba and Coutinho. Harry Maguire for £80m is a bigger crime than the hundred+ we've committed combined.
Those are based on official figures, your dumb decisions being so expensive is down to you. Not Chelsea not anyone. The only club who were willing to pay £80m for Harry was United (even City balked at the fee), the only club willing to spend £110m on Dembele was Barca. Thats not a City problem. Those players would have went for reasonable money if you didn't stump up.I mean, your not responsible for the dumb decisions we've made but our mistakes being so expensive is at least partly down to you. I guess Chelsea are probably more guilty of inflating the market but then you're citing numbers that seem to be made up so who knows.
Incredible post.You’ve got it backwards. The reason transfer outlay has ballooned is because clubs who are expected to balance their books are being forced to compete with teams who theoretically can’t go bankrupt, and as such you’ve got teams who’ve earned their money over decades like Barca actively destroying themselves to beat out the likes of City & PSG, and even financial titans like United bargain shopping for Burnley strikers because they’ve had to spend so much to catch up…. The reason United have spent as much as City IS a product of their financial doping. Not the other way around.
Not to mention that if a lot of these allegations are true, City have been paying people off the books, and therefore spending a lot more than is on the official record… that’s kinda the whole point!
Also, it’s sport, not ‘the open market’ …A department store might not get accused of financial doping when a billionaire ploughs loads of money into it, but a sports club in a league with a notion of fair sporting competition might.
I'd agree with that but I do think spending correlates more with tv income than City, PSG or whomever.There's merit in both arguments. I think the incumbents definitely needed greater investment to keep up with the likes of City and PSG.
But I also think you're 100% correct. The failures of United are wholly on the club, and not on the financial doping of City. We've shown we can compete with anyone financially, and if we were run properly, should have a couple titles to show for the last decade, irrespective of City's alleged illegal actions.
Think Barca never recovered from losing Neymar to PSG, and have had an axe to grind since then with state ownership.
Madrid and Bayern have stayed at the top table and won CL's without threatening their financial future, as have Liverpool. State ownership have definitely contributed to the spiral in money spent, astronomical wages and agent fees, but so has mega TV deals, US PE interest etc...