Jazz
Just in case anyone missed it. I don't like Mount.
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 31,143
Part 2 is quite damaging too. Part 3 promises to reveal their influence on media.[/QUOTE]
QUOTE]
Looking forward to reading that one...
Part 2 is quite damaging too. Part 3 promises to reveal their influence on media.[/QUOTE]
QUOTE]
Looking forward to reading that one...
Found the article I read the other day in the Norwegian newspaper VG (whos part of the EIC), where they interview "John", the leader of Football Leaks.How could one obtain the emails they are refering to legally? They've been hacked by all accounts.
See you're conflating your stance now.
On the topic of United and most of the other 'big boys' you're referring to, we became attractive investment opportunities after we had periods of success.
We didn't get an influx of cash and then started buying all the shiny toys, we still spent within our means and invested wisely.
Almost every business out there needs to show its worth before investors will inject more cash to help sustain it.
Also, some form of regulation was needed to stop sugar daddies over spending, because despite United, Juventus, Milan, Inter having some semblance of wealth - we still had to spend within our means, because we didn't engage in fraud, because it's illegal and immoral and only leads to corruption.
So, while FFP was misguided in it's approach and roll out, the ideology behind it makes sense.
City can spend 500m every summer for the next 10 years and it won't dent the owners' wealth at all - but it will destabilise the market and price out everyone except PSG.
What City have done to circumvent that, according to these leaks amounts to fraud and leads to corruption - and yet you're suggesting that it 'might not be above board'?
The very idea that you're trying to find some equivalence between United & City's financial history is laughably ignorant.
Finally, any small club who could dream to compete will need to be successful, elite status isn't established within a few years. It took United, Madrid, Barca, Bayern, Juventus years of winning and success to be considered elite, and they represent 0.0001% of football clubs for that very reason, eliteness isn't something to be taken lightly, and it shouldn't be something that can be bought, especially from fraudulent means.
Also, having an owner who is rich/injects cash doesn't guarantee success, see; Leeds, Malaga & Newcastle.
Imagine being okay with fraud just because some clubs are elite, jealousy must be wild
That's the point who decides the reasonable limit corruption should not condoned if City are guilty of breaking these laws they should be punished but my issue is with the very nature of FFP for all the hue and cry over City on this forum they have hardly spent outrageous money none of the player they have bought was beyond reach of other top club .I haven't read all of you guys' posts, but do you not fail to realise the difference between a sugar daddy that spends within reason, and literally endless moneybag owners that break the law, excercise corruption and threatens with lawsuits if they don't get their way? I don't think anyone is against owners spending money on their clubs, as long as it's within reason?
I don't think it's not possible, I just think there are better ways they will cook the books.They are doing that. Money and power like that makes you wreckless and getting away with it just makes them more brazen. The fact they have been able to intimidate and bribe governing bodies for a decade or so is testament to that.
True, but I just don't see it personally - there's a lot of moving parts with that strategy and for an already unprecedented move you really need all parts to be perfectly aligned.Considering Liverpool, United, Spurs and Arsenal have all lost out to Oil clubs it's not beyond the realms of being impossible. La Liga and Bundesliga also are very vocal with their disapproval. I'd only imagine Ligue 1 and Serie A share similar views.
I would say people that work closely in the economic sector, with a leading government behind them. Surely City getting paid 2.5 billion for their sponsorships, while the likes of Bayern get 270m smells fishy to you as well? Obviously there has to be some rules in place or else the integrity of the game is gone?That's the point who decides the reasonable limit corruption should not condoned if City are guilty of breaking these laws they should be punished but my issue is with the very nature of FFP for all the hue and cry over City on this forum they have hardly spent outrageous money none of the player they have bought was beyond reach of other top club .
They have the most expensive squad of all time that allows them to lose KDB and not miss him, rest players and rake up a 100 point season.That's the point who decides the reasonable limit corruption should not condoned if City are guilty of breaking these laws they should be punished but my issue is with the very nature of FFP for all the hue and cry over City on this forum they have hardly spent outrageous money none of the player they have bought was beyond reach of other top club .
Again - nobody is saying there's something wrong with City having a sugar daddy, or they shouldn't be allowed to spend his money.That's the point who decides the reasonable limit corruption should not condoned if City are guilty of breaking these laws they should be punished but my issue is with the very nature of FFP for all the hue and cry over City on this forum they have hardly spent outrageous money none of the player they have bought was beyond reach of other top club .
Money laundering is the attempt to turn illegitimate funds or cash into legitimate funds. This doesn't qualify as money laundering.Isn't this a clear case of money laundering?
Punished by who? Seems that the powers that be, and who should be upholding the integrity of the game, are equally culpable, and that is only on the face of it and their acquiescence to a bit of pressure being applied by City/PSG. (Goodness knows what you would uncover if you looked a little deeper.)City need to be punished for this, its insulting towards the sport of football their actions.
Posts like these are small timeI hope that one of the leaks is regarding St Pep the inventor of football and his magical medicine.
If there's whiffs of corruption, threats and bribery, couldn't an economic equalient to Interpol (if that even exists?) intervene and investigate?Punished by who? Seems that the powers that be, and who should be upholding the integrity of the game, are equally culpable, and that is only on the face of it and their acquiescence to a bit of pressure being applied by City/PSG. (Goodness knows what you would uncover if you looked a little deeper.)
Not really when you consider he has been caught and charged for doing it on 2- 3 occasions when he was a player.Posts like these are small time
What's worse is that they are given the best seats in the house, right beside the manager's dugout. cnuts.They were complaining about OT wifi on Sunday Supplement a few months ago.
Why accommodate them at all? I never understood that. It would be mobile phone hotspots all round if I were in charge.
I bet there are quite a few squeaky Spanish bums right now that are nothing to do with a dodgy paella.Posts like these are small time
It's not guessing at all, it's a quite reasonable assumption. First, it's highly doubtful that a single employee can have access to all emails of the main men at City. Second, if there is such a person, it's very easy to identify him/her. He/she wouldn't take the risk to stand up to such people: apart from doing something illegal by giving access to private emails, he/she might be seriously hurt by them. The most likely scenario is that they have been hacked.Found the article I read the other day in the Norwegian newspaper VG (whos part of the EIC), where they interview "John", the leader of Football Leaks.
https://www.vg.no/sport/fotball/i/0...supporterne-broedfoer-et-ukontrollert-monster
Journalist: "Considering some of the worlds largest football leaders probably wouldn't give you access to their e-mails, it would be correct to assume this has come from theft?"
"John": "Our group has never been involved in theft or hacking. Since the end of 2015 we've recieved thousands of gigabytes from different sources. Our mission has been to analyse and verify if the material is legit."
EDIT: I'm not saying the information is NOT hacked, I'm just saying it's just as much guessing as saying the documents are not. We simply do not know if there's disgruntled employees that have blown the whistle, if it's a mix, or if it's all hacked.
I can't see it for a number of reasons. First of all, interference. The Secretary for sport (who actually just resigned) might see it as majority a UEFA issue and it's up to them to decide what they want to do.Surely the minister for sport in this country should be looking into this?
Or are they on the payroll too?
If they're secretly raising the monetary amount that a sponsor is paying without the sponsor declaring then how does that work?Money laundering is the attempt to turn illegitimate funds or cash into legitimate funds. This doesn't wualiqu as money laundering.
The SFO and the SEC would have thrown the book at City if they were a publicly traded company. But they are not. City deserve all they get but I've not seen anything illegal from what has been exposed. There might be illegalities if a serious investigation is carried out. But we all know it won't happen.If they're secretly raising the monetary amount that a sponsor is paying without the sponsor declaring then how does that work?
I genuinely don't know. Doesn't that effect accounts, maybe even stock markets etc?
I know if Adidas were paying a lot less than what was announced there would be a shitstorm of mammoth proportions.
Fingers crossed for thursdays installment.I hope that one of the leaks is regarding St Pep the inventor of football and his magical medicine.
Who punishes them? UEFA? Fifa?City need to be punished for this, its insulting towards the sport of football their actions.
Southampton did it on Sunday for one.I saw a crap twitter message somewhere that said teams may refuse to play City. What would the consequences of that be if it happened?
Never going to happen. The Champions League is a bonus money train for a lot of the big clubs. There is no way clubs will turn down the chance of earning over £60m from a long run just for morals. That is part of the problem with football at the moment. The right thing is never done because of money.Is there anyway clubs can opt-out of playing in Europe?
If clubs took view that UEFA have compromised their integrity and therefore don't want to participate in any games that UEFA put on, then it will put pressure on them to bring sanctions forward.
Obviously it's a practically impossible idea, but that's the only kind of move that will really cause UEFA to act imo.
Media pressure isn't enough, and their reputation has been in the gutter for many years, they don't care.
No way city will be allowed to break the rules you say? Rules have to be lawful and that is the problem with FFP, it was on very dodgy legal ground, hence the reason they settled with the two targets of the whole scheme. Otherwise they would have been sued and lost in the European courts.Sod
Never going to happen. The Champions League is a bonus money train for a lot of the big clubs. There is no way clubs will turn down the chance of earning over £60m from a long run just for morals. That is part of the problem with football at the moment. The right thing is never done because of money.
That would be a police matter. The police are never going to get involved in this unless something clear props up. The only way something props of is if UEFA fund evidence of criminality in their investigation. From what we know, UEFA are complicit in covering up for City.If there's whiffs of corruption, threats and bribery, couldn't an economic equalient to Interpol (if that even exists?) intervene and investigate?
City win the league with 114 points.I saw a crap twitter message somewhere that said teams may refuse to play City. What would the consequences of that be if it happened?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I love how butthurt the Spanish are over the sale of Neymar .La Liga chiefs also reportedly demanding an investigation.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Again, i refuse to believe that anything substantial will come from all this.. but I hope everyone keeps the pressure up.
Alright, but if we look beyond City in this - could anything happen to UEFA/FIFA for blatantly looking the other way to corruption, and/or enabling corruption in a grand scale? I'm genuinely asking the question as I have no idea about this stuff.That would be a police matter. The police are never going to get involved in this unless something clear props up. The only way something props of is if UEFA fund evidence of criminality in their investigation. From what we know, UEFA are complicit in covering up for City.
You are not going to report your accomplice in a crime to the police.
Teams could simply play their reserves against them and kill their sense of achievement.I saw a crap twitter message somewhere that said teams may refuse to play City. What would the consequences of that be if it happened?