You have a special thread dedicated to calling anyone an ABU who says something you don’t agree with- go use that.
City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches
- Thread starter VanGaalEra
- Start date
Is there a chance nothing even comes of this except a punishment in the way of a fine which isn't even punishment for City?
M-maybe, for around two seconds or so. But it’s clear he’s signalling to his owners. It’s all there. They better look after him. He has said ‘if they lied to me’, and ‘Just in case we are not innocent we will accept what the judge decides’… that’s how he plans to try and clean up the slaughterhouse if the ‘very good lawyers’ of the nation state don’t come to the rescue.
It had the air of a hostage giving clues to his family in a video. ‘Just in case we are not innocent we will accept what the judge decides’
It’s been made clear to him by the paymaster - that one’s off the table. What was the name of that perfume?
Complicit. .
He pretended to be a man of morals. But as we all know paying lip service to ‘“I will walk if we cheated” and actually having the strength of conviction to walk when you realise your bosses cheated is another matter.
He’s been blinded by the money though. And to be fair who else will pay him 2 salaries to do his job?
This would be easy to do without restricting clubs though. You could have a deadline where the solvency of any money to be spent that year needs to be in certain accounts, verified by the league.
Verifying money really exists would be much easier than verifying where the sources of the money are.
The problem with making the PL completely “fair” is that it has never been constructed with that in mind.
The NFL has spending “minimums” as well, not just spending caps, for instance. And how are some teams supposed to meet that without going under? They spread the league income out evenly, even licensing.
But then you don’t have the massive investment to compete with other leagues, and a system like that just doesn’t work with the multi tier relegation model.
All of this stuff is just an absurd level of complexity to prevent money from coming into the league that people should be welcoming, frankly. It is making the PL a superior product to other leagues and drawing the best players.
More money will come in and you’ll see even more teams going through transformations. It will be harder to qualify for CL… BUT the PL itself will be loads better and unless they try to rig it, the CL winner will come from here nearly every year eventually.
If loads and loads of Billionaire entities were putting money into la Liga they would not have the same level of concern for the PL and “fairness”.
The ONLY thing that should be off limits is being owned by state entities and ruling families, because that is an entirely different issue than just money.
And of course breaking the law is an entirely different issue altogether. Disagreeing with the rules is one thing, but breaking the non-footballing law to get around them is an entirely different conversation.
Before he came to City, I thought he could be a principled person, who would eventually move into politics, using his popularity and fame to help push for Catalonia’s independence. My opinion has shifted.
I think his recent support of City is calculated. If he publicly presumes his employer is innocent, he has laid the foundation for his next act, in which he will claim that he was also duped all along. And if City manages to wriggle their way out of this one, he can enjoy continuous support of his chosen regime.
Last edited:
It is obvious that City have been financially doping for years now. But any hopes for them to get severe punishment are bound to end in disappointment.v
Thankfully he turned down Arsenal and joined us
Yep
The idea that City might get relegated seems unreal
Given how close are UAE and UK government, i doubt City is getting relegated, the worst that can happen to them it's a lot of points deducted(enough to stay in mid table for a long time) and no european football for some seasons.
Yet united were not the top spending club in the 90s or 00s.
Maybe success should be earned through good management, coaching and youth development instead of simply out spending every other club and breaking the rules of the game like it looks like City have done for over a decade, breaking premiership spending records. Also, the allegations of faking sponsorships and paying managers/ players off the books means they've probably spent even more than we know about!
1) He's no stranger to doping scandals
2) he must be in deep with the owners personally
https://www.sportsmole.co.uk/footba...-guardiola-fails-second-drug-test_186390.html
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...nchester-city-pep-guardiola-brother-questions
Re-read your own post. It’s the definition. What strange behaviour to regularly post on a forum of a club that you loathe.
Now all we need is Kloppo’s response to Peps rant.
The aim of FFP wasn’t initially to restrict spending it was to stop clubs getting into debt ok one may lead to another but it has always been the case that individuals have put money into their clubs . From the Moore’s family on Merseyside to Walker in Blackburn and yes even Utd have benefited from cash injections as opposed clubs living within their means
Bury were never subjected to UEFAs version of FFP so despite any claims that it has helped clubs like Bury , like Portsmouth it hasn’t indeed most football clubs even at non league which are as important to their local community as any PL club haven’t been afforded any protection from it.
So City get to play on with their bent squad for the entire time this case takes to come to a conclusion? Are the other 19 teams not up in arms about that?
Playing against a club you know are cheating whilst they continue to benefit from said cheating in competition against you is absolutely absurd.
Playing against a club you know are cheating whilst they continue to benefit from said cheating in competition against you is absolutely absurd.
You have to admire Pep’s forward planning in all this. He has obviously brought in Haaland to prepare for all those long balls in the lower leagues.
Its funny that they say they haven't done anything wrong yet they haven't cooperated with the PL since 2018, rules which they argee with to play in the PL.
If he'd really wanted to make an impact he should've had a folded up piece of paper with some FACHTS.
Of all the charges levelled against City , and yep as we know there are numerous, it’s the payments to Mancini that are , if correct, very difficult to defend
Its alleged that Mancini's first contract with City was for a base salary of £1.45m net, but his company in Italy was also allegedly paid £1.75m per annum from Al Jazira, a club where he had to coach for four days of the year as part of the arrangement.
In effect £440k plus for each day he coached Al Jazira. A decent coach yep but being paid more to do four days coaching than he was getting at City !
Mancinis company probably have been transparent and will almost certainly have or will readily confirm the validity of any such arrangement . In effect City will no doubt be quite simply be arguing nothing to do with the parent club it was a separate arrangement but let’s just reflect on that because if his base salary was indeed (only) £1.45 million for a PL manager I suspect he wouldn’t just be in the bottom half more than likely he would be in the bottom 3 in reality the going rate would be at least double the £30 k a week it is said he was earning. The tribunal will make a subjective call no doubt and if in their opinion the £30 k is not the market rate then will the ” balance of probability “ threshold be met ? I think it will
Its alleged that Mancini's first contract with City was for a base salary of £1.45m net, but his company in Italy was also allegedly paid £1.75m per annum from Al Jazira, a club where he had to coach for four days of the year as part of the arrangement.
In effect £440k plus for each day he coached Al Jazira. A decent coach yep but being paid more to do four days coaching than he was getting at City !
Mancinis company probably have been transparent and will almost certainly have or will readily confirm the validity of any such arrangement . In effect City will no doubt be quite simply be arguing nothing to do with the parent club it was a separate arrangement but let’s just reflect on that because if his base salary was indeed (only) £1.45 million for a PL manager I suspect he wouldn’t just be in the bottom half more than likely he would be in the bottom 3 in reality the going rate would be at least double the £30 k a week it is said he was earning. The tribunal will make a subjective call no doubt and if in their opinion the £30 k is not the market rate then will the ” balance of probability “ threshold be met ? I think it will
I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make...is it that you're opposed to FFP, or just don't think the authorities have done a good enough job enforcing it? Because I think it's only more recently that the FA and English leagues have introduced their own more stringent versions of financial regulations. Clubs like Bury and Portsmouth acted as the catalyst for that, which is why they weren't protected by it.
I think the issues further down the leagues are more complicated, and you missed the point about trying to make sure more money trickles down the leagues. The FA is supposed to make sure the money makes it to the grassroots, but as we know it's arguable how successful they are at doing that. The EPL and EFL are currently negotiating a new system of distribution. I think parachute payments might be scrapped, or replaced with something else.
And you're right, individuals have always invested in football clubs and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's only recently it accelerated to a point where it became problematic, with first oligarchs and then state funds getting involved.
United haven't had any real cash injection probably since the Edwards family acquired the club in the 1960s. Even then, that was less of a cash injection and more an acquisition of shares. You have to go back to 1902 and then the 1930s for that, when United were twice saved from administration by investors. They lived on their own steam and own revenue pretty much since then. The Glazers certainly haven't invested any of their own money.
Read that legal "experts" think this might take another 4 years to wrap up!
Pep will be long gone before this is wrapped up. So no-one should get too excited.
Pep will be long gone before this is wrapped up. So no-one should get too excited.
Yet before the greatest manager ever turned up at OT we were into a second decade without a title, and since he left we’ve gone a full decade and lots of lots of non oil/investment clubs have finished above us in the league.
Fergie was the difference, not some unfair big club dominance. If he’d gone to Liverpool after Dalglish, they’d have remained the dominant club, if he’d have gone to Arsenal they would’ve been the dominant PL club.
I think ultimately the greatest punishment for Man City is going to be the fact they probably can’t operate how they have been doing anymore. They’ll be under scrutiny. If they operate within the rules, they won’t be able to sustain their current cheating and subsequently become unable to compete with the big clubs.
Over 30 pages since I last visited this thread. Anything to report or we all still holding our breath?
Excellent post.
But they've already acquired 2 high quality first team, starting 11s.
Even a blind man can see there is no chance in hell that City are creating more commercial revenue than United, Barca, Madrid, Liverpool and others if it were not for "creative" methods they are using. City have so much less matchday revenue than others it is staggering to claim they have a bigger base than those teams mentioned here above.
In regards to Pep his press conference was quite something. If City have nothing to hide why have they been fighting in courtrooms for the past years trying to stop the PL from investigating them? Why have they been no compliant regarding handing over info they are supposed to do by PL rules? Then Pep and the club come out and claim to be happy about the matter coming to a close because it will prove them innocent. Why then fight and slow down the process for all this time? Should they not have been happy to speed the process up if they are so sure of beining innocent?
In regards to Pep his press conference was quite something. If City have nothing to hide why have they been fighting in courtrooms for the past years trying to stop the PL from investigating them? Why have they been no compliant regarding handing over info they are supposed to do by PL rules? Then Pep and the club come out and claim to be happy about the matter coming to a close because it will prove them innocent. Why then fight and slow down the process for all this time? Should they not have been happy to speed the process up if they are so sure of beining innocent?
I guess neither of us can prove our points. We don’t know what would’ve happened under different circumstances. To me, Wenger was a genius, (and an equal manager to Fergie) who could break the pattern for a while, but in the end Utd’s superior finances held sway, a bit like Dortmund/Bayern in the Bundesliga. Without the oil clubs I think we’d be having a Bayern Munich style dominance from Utd, even now. But as I say at the beginning of this there are lots of hypotheticals which are impossible to prove or disprove.
I don't follow, why would Pep want to run the risk of tainting his whole managerial career for a club like City, when he could have done the same things if not better for a historically top club, without the need to run the risk of been associated with a club been accused the things City are.
100% this will happen.
It is all for show.
The PL/FA should not have allowed Roman to purchase Chelsea.
They should not have allowed countries to buy City and Newcastle and the three clubs should not have been allowed to distort the competition completely.
Same for the Glazers and their treatment of our club.
All have been allowed to happen.
The authorities value the money over anything (including FIFA and the World Cup).
Since Chelsea started financially doping 20 years ago it has all been allowed and the competition has been effectively over. So if Qatar buys us, morals or not, it’s just a continuation of what has already been permitted.
ABUs like Jonathan Liew have not got a leg to stand on as they have kept their mouths shut until now
We all will remember with amusement that rant from the BFSW all those years ago
Grass Roots football clubs by and large pay far more out than they reasonably can afford and my guess would be if they received extra money all that would happen is players would get extra.Not sure it’s still the cash but may EPL clubs supporters are subsidised ( if that’s the right word ) to circa 50% of the gate by way of PL distribution
But are we really talking about grass roots ? There are far far more clubs outside the EFL &PL combined yet other than parachute payments from EFL 2 to the NL those 100s of clubs receive diddly squat and rely to a very large extent of owners cash yet no body really factor in these clubs
I am not opposed to the principal of FFP but for me a far bigger danger to a clubs very existence is accumulated debt as opposed to someone putting money in as long is there isn’t any charge or debt levied on the club.
Grass Roots football clubs by and large pay far more out than they reasonably can afford and my guess would be if they received extra money all that would happen is players would get extra.Not sure it’s still the cash but may EPL clubs supporters are subsidised ( if that’s the right word ) to circa 50% of the gate by way of PL distribution
But are we really talking about grass roots ? There are far far more clubs outside the EFL &PL combined yet other than parachute payments from EFL 2 to the NL those 100s of clubs receive diddly squat and rely to a very large extent of owners cash yet no body really factor in these clubs
No mate. You really are. Do you think we cant spot a WUM as blatant as you.
feck me, what absolute drivel.
But we can however prove our points by the sheer fact that pre Fergie we won feck all, despite our finances and post Fergie we’ve won feck all.
Let’s not pretend that in a Cityless World, the likes of Liverpool wouldn’t have absolutely battered United since Fergie left, as they have done, hell even Spurs, despite United’s size and apparently unfair advantage.
Last edited:
Jesus.How would we be having United dominance even now? Because the evidence does not back up your claim. We went 26 years without a title pre SAF and currently 10 years post SAF. I’d suggest taking your ABU blinkers off and realising that the evidence is smack bang in front of your face.
The fact that you’d rather financial doping and blatant cheating of the entire league than see United be successful is where your issue lies.
The point here isn't the unfairness of football finances, the lack of policies that would make a more fair 'league' in terms of wage spend and so forth. That's a fair and valid discussion that should be had.
City signed up to rules which they actively, knowingly broke for years on end. Then lied about breaking them, then hid the evidence, then refused to cooperate with the regulators.
Arguing about the validity of the PL rules is akin to getting caught just over the limit, fleeing the scene, then perjuring yourself about the incident happening - and then publically saying you believe that the limit is too low, and you were perfectly safe driving and no one was really at risk. It doesn't matter, the rules be the rules.
City signed up to rules which they actively, knowingly broke for years on end. Then lied about breaking them, then hid the evidence, then refused to cooperate with the regulators.
Arguing about the validity of the PL rules is akin to getting caught just over the limit, fleeing the scene, then perjuring yourself about the incident happening - and then publically saying you believe that the limit is too low, and you were perfectly safe driving and no one was really at risk. It doesn't matter, the rules be the rules.
Read it for yourself its will be clear to you then. And make your own mind up.
Yes they have and they deserve plenty of punishment. But my point is they won’t be able to continue their “success” going forward as they can’t fund their cheating any more. No matter how much they try, they just can’t make themselves generate the revenue they’ve been showing on the books. Even a lot of City fans have convinced themselves they are innocent and fully believe they generate more revenue than all of Europe’s big teams.