City and Financial Doping | Charged by PL with numerous FFP breaches

[Rooney in Paris]

I mean, it's kinda funny how much they don't give a feck anymore, really.

 

[kaiser1]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Redbull clubs do this and no one seems to care

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman
That is the goal of the multiclub entities

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Redbull clubs do this and no one seems to care

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman
That is the goal of the multiclub entities

People care. It was highlighted as an issue during the Sesko saga last summer.

Unless you mean the media - in which case, yes, their complicit silence on this is just another area where they fail in their most basic journalistic duties. No surprise there.

 

[rimaldo]

Redbull clubs do this and no one seems to care

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman
That is the goal of the multiclub entities

when a farmer farms, no one looks at the plough.

 

[Grande]

Redbull clubs do this and no one seems to care

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman
That is the goal of the multiclub entities

That is one of many issues with the multiclub entities.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

Redbull clubs do this and no one seems to care

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman
That is the goal of the multiclub entities

Rightly or wrongly, people seem to 'care' more (get annoyed by it) the bigger and more successful the club / person is doing it.

I was thinking it was out of order when Watford were doing so many transfers between them, Udinese and Granada. And, as you say, the Red Bull teams. The City groups actions should have raised a lot more red flags than it has done. As some have said on here, there'll be a lot more talk / outrage about it if United start doing similar with the other Ineos clubs.

It's something that's been allowed to seep into Football, I imagine because the clubs doing it have mostly been nouveau riche clubs who are looking to challenge the elite ones, and so people have been quite happy to see them succeed (up to the usual point that they, in turn, join the 'big nasty teams at the top').

 

[duffer]

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman

No.

 

[bosskeano]

INEOS need to sell Nice and Lausanne imo.

why??

i mean if fecking City can get away with it having nothing said or done about it....why not utilize that same model and plan

 

[Solius]

why??

i mean if fecking City can get away with it having nothing said or done about it....why not utilize that same model and plan

Because the integrity of the game is gone. Just because other clubs do it why should we stoop to that level? Multi-club ownership should be banned entirely.

Would you like to see us utilize the same model and plan City did by financially doping for 16 years?

 

[reddyornot]

With those ears he could play for Ferengi city.

 

[Zen86]

Because the integrity of the game is gone. Just because other clubs do it why should we stoop to that level? Multi-club ownership should be banned entirely.

Would you like to see us utilize the same model and plan City did by financially doping for 16 years?

I’m fully against this type of stuff in football, but we’re not going to win any medals for not doing it when nobody gives a shit about City et al doing the same.

 

[Solius]

I’m fully against this type of stuff in football, but we’re not going to win any medals for not doing it when nobody gives a shit about City et al doing the same.

It's a slippery slope. It needs to be stopped entirely before we're in a huge mess of every single club being under an umbrella of ownership and players moving around the same pathways. It's dull and as I said, ruins the integrity of it all.

 

[Oranges038]

Are you suggesting Man City would resort to nefarious dealings to circumvent the rules of football?

Surely not.

Sure, they did it with Lampard. This is just more of the same.

 

[SilentWitness]

It's a slippery slope. It needs to be stopped entirely before we're in a huge mess of every single club being under an umbrella of ownership and players moving around the same pathways. It's dull and as I said, ruins the integrity of it all.

It's utter shite. I feel sorry for clubs that are in the chain. Said it in the thread about multi-club ownership but a few PL clubs (Burnley and Bournemouth) are now purchasing Scottish teams and have made no secret about the fact that the Scottish teams are just going to be the small club in the chain.

 

[Solius]

It's utter shite. I feel sorry for clubs that are in the chain. Said it in the thread about multi-club ownership but a few PL clubs (Burnley and Bournemouth) are now purchasing Scottish teams and have made no secret about the fact that the Scottish teams are just going to be the small club in the chain.

It must be so demoralising to be one of those clubs. You're just being used to benefit some other team.

 

[roonster09]

Redbull clubs do this and no one seems to care

Didn't Zhirkov transfer from CSKA to Chelsea when both were owned by Roman
That is the goal of the multiclub entities

This unconditional love from Bayern fans towards City is nauseating.

 

[kaiser1]

People care. It was highlighted as an issue during the Sesko saga last summer.

Unless you mean the media - in which case, yes, their complicit silence on this is just another area where they fail in their most basic journalistic duties. No surprise there.

Probably you care about Sesko because he was linked to Man Utd and some fans were disappointed to lose him in what seemed like an inhouse dealing
Salzburg to Leipzig transfers will be close to a dozen before Sesko and very few raised dust

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Probably you care about Sesko because he was linked to Man Utd and some fans were disappointed to lose him in what seemed like an inhouse dealing
Salzburg to Leipzig transfers will be close to a dozen before Sesko and very few raised dust

I was taking the Sesko case as the most recent one that came to mind but no, you are mistaken - loads of people on this forum have raised the multi club ownership model as being a real issue. It's just not discussed in media because they're absolutely shite at their jobs.

 

[kaiser1]

Rightly or wrongly, people seem to 'care' more (get annoyed by it) the bigger and more successful the club / person is doing it.

I was thinking it was out of order when Watford were doing so many transfers between them, Udinese and Granada. And, as you say, the Red Bull teams. The City groups actions should have raised a lot more red flags than it has done. As some have said on here, there'll be a lot more talk / outrage about it if United start doing similar with the other Ineos clubs.

It's something that's been allowed to seep into Football, I imagine because the clubs doing it have mostly been nouveau riche clubs who are looking to challenge the elite ones, and so people have been quite happy to see them succeed (up to the usual point that they, in turn, join the 'big nasty teams at the top').

So we are kay or overlook it as long as they don't threaten our clubs the ones at the top. Leipzig Watford model has been upsetting the Freiburg, Augsburg Leeds, Southampton before now. The way City upset United fans and Hull City probably doesnt care much. They get shafted either way and for long by the big boys anyway.

 

[RedRocket9908]

I was taking the Sesko case as the most recent one that came to mind but no, you are mistaken - loads of people on this forum have raised the multi club ownership model as being a real issue. It's just not discussed in media because they're absolutely shite at their jobs.

Red Bull dont own RB Salzburg they only sponsor them so Sesko moving from there to Leipzig is a lot different to players moving between clubs with the same owners.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

Red Bull dont own RB Salzburg they only sponsor them so Sesko moving from there to Leipzig is a lot different to players moving between clubs with the same owners.

Yes I'm aware of this, although the conflict of interest (which is at the heart of this issue) still absolutely exists in this situation. I don't believe for a second that RB Salzburg and RB Leipzig don't prefer to deal with each other, all things being equal, than other clubs.

 

[kaiser1]

No.

No?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/aug/27/championsleague200405.championsleague

Uefa is to investigate Roman Abramovich's links with CSKA Moscow after Chelsea were drawn in the same Champions League group as the Russian club yesterday. The oil company of which Abramovich is the majority shareholder, Sibneft, signed a $54m (£30m) three-year sponsorship deal with CSKA in March and Uefa wants to establish whether the Chelsea owner has deeper ties with the club.

But Chelsea said last night that neither Sibneft nor Abramovich have a stake "or any direct interest" in CSKA, adding that Uefa and other Champions League clubs should be "completely unconcerned" by the shirt sponsorship link.

"We are going to look into it and see if there is a controlling interest by Mr Abramovich with two teams in the same group," said Uefa's communications director, William Gaillard. "We have to find out whether it is a controlling interest or not. We may already have the facts to decide to dismiss it as a problem but it has to be looked into thoroughly."

Chelsea's draw with CSKA added to the intrigue in a group in which they also face Porto, their manager Jose Mourinho's previous club, and Paris St-Germain.

A Sibneft spokesman insisted there was "no conflict of interest" involving Abramovich. "We have no equity ownership of CSKA so we have no ability or desire to influence them as a company or a team," said John A Mann II, its head of media relations.
"I cannot support any conspiracy theories because we don't tell CSKA how to play and Sibneft has no direct relationship with Chelsea."

 

[Bertie Wooster]

So we are kay or overlook it as long as they don't threaten our clubs the ones at the top. Leipzig Watford model has been upsetting the Freiburg, Augsburg Leeds, Southampton before now. The way City upset United fans and Hull City probably doesnt care much. They get shafted either way and for long by the big boys anyway.

Not the point I was making, no.

Though I guess in terms of a Man United forum then, yeah, there'll be more discussion about things that directly effect us more, just like other clubs forums will have more discussion about the stuff that effects them the most.

But my main point was more about the public and media in general. And, generally speaking, there seems much more of an outcry when the culprits deemed to be guilty / getting away with it are the more rich and powerful than the 'underdogs'.

In this situation, I don't think it annoys people that nouveau riche clubs are coming along and looking to find ways around FFP - as they've bought into the narrative that it's only been introduced to keep the status quo for the big teams so finding ways around it are 'fine' - and that includes the multi club thing as it's mostly, so far, not been done by 'traditional big powers'.

I agree that's wrong. And it shouldn't have been allowed to have become such a growing thing. I was just giving my reasons why I think if hasn't been highlighted, objected to and stamped out as it should have been.

 

[Oranges038]

Red Bull dont own RB Salzburg they only sponsor them so Sesko moving from there to Leipzig is a lot different to players moving between clubs with the same owners.

Come on, there was a box ticking excerise to get around UEFA regulations so both teams could compete in Europe. In reality all they did was remove a few people from certain positions and change how some money was being spent.

Red Bull still effectively owns both teams.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

Come on, there was a box ticking excerise to get around UEFA regulations so both teams could compete in Europe. In reality all they did was remove a few people from certain positions and change how some money was being spent.

Red Bull still effectively owns both teams.

That's certainly how I understood it, yeah. Just finding a way that the ownership can be deemed legal in a way all the clubs can still compete in European competitions.

 

[Oranges038]

That's certainly how I understood it, yeah. Just finding a way that the ownership can be deemed legal in a way all the clubs can still compete in European competitions.

That's almost certainly all it was.

https://www.redbull.com/my-en/teams/rb-leipzig

https://www.redbull.com/my-en/red-bull-salzburg-10-in-a-row

Why would you brand and trumpet a team you no longer own?

 

[HTG]

This unconditional love from Bayern fans towards City is nauseating.

Hey, I very publicly and in an outspoken way hate them and everything they represent.

 

[duffer]

No?

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2004/aug/27/championsleague200405.championsleague

Did you read the article you posted?

Roman has never owned CSKA.

 

[Wheato]

Hard for us to moan about this when our new joint owner has 3 clubs. And if Todibo joins us for a snip, then we'll all be quite pleased with the set up.

I would argue that this model has more merit, because the clubs and scouting networks put the work in to find and develop players. The nursery clubs also benefit financially, and looking at Girona and Nice's current league positions, they seem to be riding high in their own leagues. Unlike previously. So it seems to be a win win situation.

We only find this crooked and underhand because it is attached to City, who have clearly broken just about every rule in the book for inflating bogus sponsorship deals, offering dual bank accounts for players and managers, to hide huge bonus payments, tapping up youngsters and failure to co-operate in an ongoing investigation.

We all know they are dirty, but this is the least of their crimes.

 

[90 + 5min]

Every time this thread is on top I am thinking somethings being done.

If football don't follow its own rules it will implode. Sooner than we think.

 

[Solius]

Hard for us to moan about this when our new joint owner has 3 clubs. And if Todibo joins us for a snip, then we'll all be quite pleased with the set up.

I would argue that this model has more merit, because the clubs and scouting networks put the work in to find and develop players. The nursery clubs also benefit financially, and looking at Girona and Nice's current league positions, they seem to be riding high in their own leagues. Unlike previously. So it seems to be a win win situation.

We only find this crooked and underhand because it is attached to City, who have clearly broken just about every rule in the book for inflating bogus sponsorship deals, offering dual bank accounts for players and managers, to hide huge bonus payments, tapping up youngsters and failure to co-operate in an ongoing investigation.

We all know they are dirty, but this is the least of their crimes.

Is it? I absolutely want multi-club ownership gone and have already said I think INEOS should sell Nice and Laussane. It's a conflict of interest and any Todibo transfer would be messy and not feel good either.

But judging by the Greenwood thread it seems I'm in the minority as football > morality most of the time for people.

 

[HTG]

Every time this thread is on top I am thinking somethings being done.

If football don't follow its own rules it will implode. Sooner than we think.

Don’t think it will. Some people will turn away. But they’ll compensate by whoring the game out to other countries and easily make more money than before.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

Hard for us to moan about this when our new joint owner has 3 clubs. And if Todibo joins us for a snip, then we'll all be quite pleased with the set up.

I would argue that this model has more merit, because the clubs and scouting networks put the work in to find and develop players. The nursery clubs also benefit financially, and looking at Girona and Nice's current league positions, they seem to be riding high in their own leagues. Unlike previously. So it seems to be a win win situation.

We only find this crooked and underhand because it is attached to City, who have clearly broken just about every rule in the book for inflating bogus sponsorship deals, offering dual bank accounts for players and managers, to hide huge bonus payments, tapping up youngsters and failure to co-operate in an ongoing investigation.

We all know they are dirty, but this is the least of their crimes.

While probably true in terms of the hypocrisy of some fans looking to defend it as soon as their club becomes 'part of the problem' too, I'd say that it's not true that the only reason many people have a problem with it is because of City.

Personally speaking, I've long been questioning the validity of teams like Watford / Udinese / Granada being owned by the same people (all these ownerships are tweaked in different ways but it's basically the same owners doing business with themselves!) When Watford got promoted from the Championship with loads of players on loan from their Serie A and La Liga teams they co-owned, I didn't think that was right. When Watford became the 'bigger' team by being in the PL, and started loaning loads of their players to the other two I still thought it was dodgy.

And same with the Red Bull ownership model and there many signings between the clubs. And obviously the City Football Group is the most significant for us because it directly effects us the most, so gets more comments on here. But it all should have been addressed ages ago in my opinion. As it all creates potential conflicts of interests, allows teams to do a FFP equivalent of money laundering, and when it's done on as big as scale as the City Group it distorts the market as it allows the same owners of mass clubs to sign up loads of talent from all over the place and have a say on who they play for, who they don't sign for, etc. It's manipulating the market in a global way that shouldn't be allowed from the same owners.

 

[tomaldinho1]

Hard for us to moan about this when our new joint owner has 3 clubs. And if Todibo joins us for a snip, then we'll all be quite pleased with the set up.

I would argue that this model has more merit, because the clubs and scouting networks put the work in to find and develop players. The nursery clubs also benefit financially, and looking at Girona and Nice's current league positions, they seem to be riding high in their own leagues. Unlike previously. So it seems to be a win win situation.

We only find this crooked and underhand because it is attached to City, who have clearly broken just about every rule in the book for inflating bogus sponsorship deals, offering dual bank accounts for players and managers, to hide huge bonus payments, tapping up youngsters and failure to co-operate in an ongoing investigation.

We all know they are dirty, but this is the least of their crimes.

I'll happily moan, just because our new minority owner has a multi club model doesn't mean it's now right. It should be banned completely. If you invest in football, your money should be going completely into one club.

The issue is how would they actually stop/police this - I'm not sure it's possible to stop to be honest - so it's just something we will moan about but will never change.

 

[Sassy Colin]

Is it? I absolutely want multi-club ownership gone and have already said I think INEOS should sell Nice and Laussane. It's a conflict of interest and any Todibo transfer would be messy and not feel good either.

But judging by the Greenwood thread it seems I'm in the minority as football > morality most of the time for people.

Todibo isn't going to be a cut price dodgy deal though. It's going to be at full value on an arms length basis in competition with other clubs.

 

[90 + 5min]

Don’t think it will. Some people will turn away. But they’ll compensate by whoring the game out to other countries and easily make more money than before.

Some people have already had enough. I know few of them. I can only guess that if I know people everyone else does that to. Some people can quickly become lot of people.

 

[matt10000]

why??

i mean if fecking City can get away with it having nothing said or done about it....why not utilize that same model and plan

Because that’s one of the many differences between us and city and why when we win something it counts for something whereas when city win something it counts for nothing other than stopping real clubs winning

 

[bosskeano]

Because that’s one of the many differences between us and city and why when we win something it counts for something whereas when city win something it counts for nothing other than stopping real clubs winning

so the moral highground

 

[MrMarcello]

That's certainly how I understood it, yeah. Just finding a way that the ownership can be deemed legal in a way all the clubs can still compete in European competitions.

Will this affect Girona if/when they qualify for CL or EL?

 

[matt10000]

so the moral highground

well I call it not cheating but yea if you like