Indeed. Especially while keeping in mind that FFP didn't exist until the noughties. The moral programming is too selective and delirious for my buy-in.
Without state cheating, we’d have 2 PL titles in the post-Ferguson era: Would you look upon the era as such a calamity via that lens?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
I don't think anyone should get the titles after they get voided by EPL. They should be marked as void in the history books so the stain which City have left on the English game is visible for future generations and lessons not forgotten.
Thats a great suggestion.
I think if city are found to have cheated on such a large scale then all discussion about this last 10 years become very different. You have to take the cheating into account when analysing the success (or lack of) every United manager post Fergie.
No cheating divs means the scousers win the league in 2014 which maybe creates a sliding doors moment where Suarez stays for a couple more years and they have a period of domination? Or does it mean Rodgers stays for longer and his flaws become more apparent and Liverpool's 2014 title becomes more akin to Leeds '92 than United '93? Maybe Moyes (not feeling the pressure after 2 heavy defeats v City) takes us to 4th in 2014 meaning Van Gaal never takes over.
Maybe Mourinho's second Chelsea spell is longer and more fruitful meaning Leicester don't win the league in 2016? Maybe he doesn't take over United?
Maybe he does take over at United and when not up against Klopp and Guardiola, Mourinho dominates with us and we win a couple of titles.
Thinking about it, I think the biggest lovers here were probably Chelsea (assuming they weren't cheating themselves.)
There's a good chance that the likes of Toure, Silva, Aguero etc consider them an option without city's millions being thrown at them. Kompany (annoyed at the lack of success at city) probably moves to London as well and becomes a replacement/partner for Terry.
No cheating divs means the scousers win the league in 2014 which maybe creates a sliding doors moment where Suarez stays for a couple more years and they have a period of domination? Or does it mean Rodgers stays for longer and his flaws become more apparent and Liverpool's 2014 title becomes more akin to Leeds '92 than United '93? Maybe Moyes (not feeling the pressure after 2 heavy defeats v City) takes us to 4th in 2014 meaning Van Gaal never takes over.
Maybe Mourinho's second Chelsea spell is longer and more fruitful meaning Leicester don't win the league in 2016? Maybe he doesn't take over United?
Maybe he does take over at United and when not up against Klopp and Guardiola, Mourinho dominates with us and we win a couple of titles.
Thinking about it, I think the biggest lovers here were probably Chelsea (assuming they weren't cheating themselves.)
There's a good chance that the likes of Toure, Silva, Aguero etc consider them an option without city's millions being thrown at them. Kompany (annoyed at the lack of success at city) probably moves to London as well and becomes a replacement/partner for Terry.
Last edited:
Other clubs have won the league despite their cheating.
Missing out on UCL multiple times and being complete shite in most of those seasons. No I would not look at it differently
I hate that some use City's 'cheating' as a scapegoat for our underperformance.
On the pitch, they haven't cheated, they've simply been better. They've been better than us at recruitment too, despite spending a comparable amount over the period.
I'm generally not a fan of Financial Fair Play, as all it does is make sure that the biggest clubs stay at the top. Why is it fair that we're allowed to use all of our resources to invest into our team, but City aren't based on arbitrary past performance and global popularity?
FFP makes most sense when it's used to discourage owners from running their teams into the ground, like with what happened to Everton.
The real injustice in all of this, is that the Glazers were ever able to buy United with debt. Imagine where we'd be if we were run properly, and what our stadium and facilities would look like without those parasites in charge.
I expect many will disagree, but Financial Fair Play is anything but fair.
On the pitch, they haven't cheated, they've simply been better. They've been better than us at recruitment too, despite spending a comparable amount over the period.
I'm generally not a fan of Financial Fair Play, as all it does is make sure that the biggest clubs stay at the top. Why is it fair that we're allowed to use all of our resources to invest into our team, but City aren't based on arbitrary past performance and global popularity?
FFP makes most sense when it's used to discourage owners from running their teams into the ground, like with what happened to Everton.
The real injustice in all of this, is that the Glazers were ever able to buy United with debt. Imagine where we'd be if we were run properly, and what our stadium and facilities would look like without those parasites in charge.
I expect many will disagree, but Financial Fair Play is anything but fair.
Agree. A lot of things could have changed. Without City and their financial doping in picture, we might have stuck with LVG for a third season because we would have still been able to finish in top 4. And instead of Mourinho period, it would have been Giggs taking over from 2017-2018 season. Mourinho at Chelsea without City competing for players, would likely have been able to refresh his squad and better damage control his third season meltdown to stay put at Chelsea. We may not know how well Giggs would really do inheriting LVG's squad (LVG squad building plan is very questionable), but with his domestic issue thus forced resignation in 2020, would have thrown us into a turmoil. Ole comes to rescue in alternative reality?
Pep might have stayed at Bayern longer or advent in Serie A before moving to PL (after Wenger retirement), that gave Klopp an easier headstart than it had played out without Pep in the picture. His Liverpool squad rebuild would have likely completed sooner, and he would have enjoyed more successes. This in another word means that we might have missed out our Mourinho's second season 2nd place finish and Ole 2nd place finish with a style built on partial Mourinho's counter attacking principles altogether!!! No titles for us.
Edit note: the idea that Pep would choose us if not for state owned cheat in alternative reality is unlikely, given how Woodward and his group are so power hungry and incompetent. Pep clearly wants to work with a set up where DoF would support him than Adult DisneyLand project where he's forced out of his comfort zone to do all the leg works.
Pep might have stayed at Bayern longer or advent in Serie A before moving to PL (after Wenger retirement), that gave Klopp an easier headstart than it had played out without Pep in the picture. His Liverpool squad rebuild would have likely completed sooner, and he would have enjoyed more successes. This in another word means that we might have missed out our Mourinho's second season 2nd place finish and Ole 2nd place finish with a style built on partial Mourinho's counter attacking principles altogether!!! No titles for us.
Edit note: the idea that Pep would choose us if not for state owned cheat in alternative reality is unlikely, given how Woodward and his group are so power hungry and incompetent. Pep clearly wants to work with a set up where DoF would support him than Adult DisneyLand project where he's forced out of his comfort zone to do all the leg works.
Not as simple as that.
You have to factor in those players that City got, where do they end up otherwise? Does Pep end up at Arsenal (he talked about them a lot while at Barca), do they build multiple winning sides under him, do Chelsea and Arsenal win more. Things could go our way as well. There's so many dominoes to fall a different way without that huge financial doping at City, getting and keeping Pep for seven years and counting while his wife lives in Spain.
Those two seasons at second with 74 and 81 points might mean we're still second even third.
In 2014 4th place had 79 points
Last edited:
Your two paragraphs directly contradict each other.
Obviously it's impossible to tell for sure how it would play out with City out of the equation, and they are obviously the best team after City on paper, but based on league standings they would literally have just one more title than us.
Yeah agreed around the variables/unknowns.
I was just basing it off the assumption that the knock-on effect of chasing City hard on 2/3 occasions to the last day of the season or so, must have taken it out of their squad quite a bit. Assuming more rotation, less competition in the market for signings, Pool might have been a little bit more consistent/dominant domestically - outside of the league, City's won the most domestic cups as well.
But alas, was just an observation and as you stated, too many unknowns versus factual league finishes.
It doesn't. Read again.