| Man City - GUILTY 14:45 - Sep 25 with 36375 views | Northernr |
On all charges. Punishment? Errrrr, haven't decided yet.
|  | | |  |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:19 - Sep 30 with 1562 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 19:46 - Sep 30 by QPROslo |
Agree with that from Burnham. There is too much leaping to judgement especially so when City are denying the charges and saying they will appeal. |
There's been a full and lengthy hearing where both sides have had the opportunity to present evidence.
'Leaping' to judgement is exactly what you do in those circumstances.
City are trying to push a narrative that their side of the story hasn't been heard yet. That is 24 carat bollox! [Post edited 30 Sep 21:10]
|  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:41 - Sep 30 with 1479 views | daveB |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:19 - Sep 30 by KensalT |
There's been a full and lengthy hearing where both sides have had the opportunity to present evidence.
'Leaping' to judgement is exactly what you do in those circumstances.
City are trying to push a narrative that their side of the story hasn't been heard yet. That is 24 carat bollox! [Post edited 30 Sep 21:10]
|
No Prime Minster is going to come out and have a go at the City Owners becasue we have very close trade relationships with them and much more. I thought he was as diplomatic as he could be in the circumstances. I'm not really sure why he's being asked about it to be honest. |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:44 - Sep 30 with 1464 views | CiderwithRsie |
I quite liked the suggestion that relegation to the Championship isn't enough, they should be made to play in Scotland. |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:45 - Sep 30 with 1464 views | daveB |
| Man City - GUILTY on 18:40 - Sep 30 by Northernr |
There's another point I've seen made today that let's say QPR get to the Premier League, and let's say I as a fan want to give them £50m to put Loftforwords.co.uk as the front shirt sponsor (Patreon's had a good month). I'm not allowed to do it, because it's not "fair market rate". But if I want to give Man Utd £50m to put it on their shirt, that would be fine. |
Thats a great example of why the rules are a farce, you've got clubs falling overthemselves to break them. The idea was to protect clubs but it hasn't done that at all. They should have scrapped FFP or whatever they call it now ages ago.
But as with Southampton in the summer and the spy stuff if you sign up to these rules no matter how daft they are you have to adhere to them and when you break them and get caught hard luck. I don't like the rules but when QPR got done by them there was no use blaming everyone else, it was our owners fault. Same here.
Football has gone mad the last 15 years with accountants and lawyers taking over the game thats before you put VAR in and have to change the rules every 5 minutes to try and make it work. Football needs a massive reset. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:06 - Sep 30 with 1411 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:41 - Sep 30 by daveB |
No Prime Minster is going to come out and have a go at the City Owners becasue we have very close trade relationships with them and much more. I thought he was as diplomatic as he could be in the circumstances. I'm not really sure why he's being asked about it to be honest. |
My point wasn't really about Burnham.
City are trying to push a false narrative that their side of the story hasn't been heard yet. That is patently untrue.
There was a former City CEO on TalkSport today doing precisely that. Trying to make everyone believe that there is more to come - see below.
City has issued statements where they have referred to the judgement of the independent commission as just an "opinion", when it is really the result of a full legal process.
It's a PR campaign to undermine the validity of the process. And just like Southampton with Spygate, the aim is to keep their own supporters onboard because if they lose them then they know the jig is up.
As for Burnham being asked about it? When you're as wealthy as the City owners you have the power to ensure politicians get asked awkward questions in public.
Burnham would probably prefer not to be involved!
| | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:25 - Sep 30 with 1357 views | ManinBlack |
| Man City - GUILTY on 16:38 - Sep 30 by Clint_Power |
It's amazing how dislikable Man City have become considering how much goodwill they had before their blatant cheating. When they won the league against us I was genuinely happy, first and foremost because QPR were safe, but once that was secure I was delighted that they pipped Man U to the title: I really despised Man U in the 90's and 00's. But since then, their distortion of any sort of fair play and equitable competition in football combined with their attitude has made them my most disliked club in football behind Chelsea, and that's saying something given how much I still dislike Man U and the other clubs at the top.of the pyramid. |
I did say after that City game that I was unimpressed that we had fans celebrating a winning goal against us. That was a game we should have stopped City winning the league and the kudos we would have got from that. I said at the time City would go and dominate and all we would have done is temporarily delay them winning the Premiership. It was clear with their state funding they would be financial giants buying all the trophies. I get that people hated Man Utd that day but I said after that game that in time people would come to hate City too. I was right about that looking at what fans of other clubs have to say about them.
Anyway can someone wake me up when the 3-2 defeat that day gets overturned for cheating... |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:35 - Sep 30 with 1325 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:06 - Sep 30 by KensalT |
My point wasn't really about Burnham.
City are trying to push a false narrative that their side of the story hasn't been heard yet. That is patently untrue.
There was a former City CEO on TalkSport today doing precisely that. Trying to make everyone believe that there is more to come - see below.
City has issued statements where they have referred to the judgement of the independent commission as just an "opinion", when it is really the result of a full legal process.
It's a PR campaign to undermine the validity of the process. And just like Southampton with Spygate, the aim is to keep their own supporters onboard because if they lose them then they know the jig is up.
As for Burnham being asked about it? When you're as wealthy as the City owners you have the power to ensure politicians get asked awkward questions in public.
Burnham would probably prefer not to be involved!
|
I saw this earlier and can't believe the bullshit the City bloke comes out. Conspiracy theories FFS. The eluding to some piece of evidence that will clear them of everything. Yeah, right.
In a weird way, this whole saga may be the best thing that has happened to English football. Just like Italian football in the 90s, the scandals just kept stacking up and the football became boring. Top players stopped moving to Serie A and the decline set in.
History most definitely rhymes. | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 22:20 - Sep 30 with 1192 views | KensalT |
Shameless.
And completely deluded.
Etihad's contract is with Man City. If the club has brought their name into disrepute then their claim is against the club they have the contract with, not the independent body that found them guilty of wrongdoing.
Clubs aren't above the law just because their sponsors might get lawyered up when they are found guilty of cheating.
And did no one stop to think about the optics of a club found guilty of colluding with sponsors then getting their sponsor to try and intimidate the PL into backing down?
Unbelievable!
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Man City - GUILTY on 22:33 - Sep 30 with 1146 views | daveB |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:06 - Sep 30 by KensalT |
My point wasn't really about Burnham.
City are trying to push a false narrative that their side of the story hasn't been heard yet. That is patently untrue.
There was a former City CEO on TalkSport today doing precisely that. Trying to make everyone believe that there is more to come - see below.
City has issued statements where they have referred to the judgement of the independent commission as just an "opinion", when it is really the result of a full legal process.
It's a PR campaign to undermine the validity of the process. And just like Southampton with Spygate, the aim is to keep their own supporters onboard because if they lose them then they know the jig is up.
As for Burnham being asked about it? When you're as wealthy as the City owners you have the power to ensure politicians get asked awkward questions in public.
Burnham would probably prefer not to be involved!
|
I hadn't seen a lot of that today but that is bloody shameless of them, they have really doubled down and gone on the attack | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 22:45 - Sep 30 with 1109 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 22:33 - Sep 30 by daveB |
I hadn't seen a lot of that today but that is bloody shameless of them, they have really doubled down and gone on the attack |
A sure sign that they know how much trouble they're in. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 23:26 - Sep 30 with 1028 views | kensalriser |
| Man City - GUILTY on 22:20 - Sep 30 by KensalT |
Shameless.
And completely deluded.
Etihad's contract is with Man City. If the club has brought their name into disrepute then their claim is against the club they have the contract with, not the independent body that found them guilty of wrongdoing.
Clubs aren't above the law just because their sponsors might get lawyered up when they are found guilty of cheating.
And did no one stop to think about the optics of a club found guilty of colluding with sponsors then getting their sponsor to try and intimidate the PL into backing down?
Unbelievable!
|
This isn't a surprise. These are wealthy, privileged, entitled people who are used to having everything their way and getting whatever they want. They don't have an electorate to account to and aren't used to abiding by laws because they are the law, and they are contemptuous of democratic systems of governance. The really stupid bit is we've given them and continue to give them all their wealth and influence by dragging our heels on domestic energy security. |  |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 00:36 - Oct 1 with 943 views | CLAREMAN1995 |
| Man City - GUILTY on 20:44 - Sep 30 by CiderwithRsie |
I quite liked the suggestion that relegation to the Championship isn't enough, they should be made to play in Scotland. |
No the Championship would be incredible next year with Haaland playing at Loftus Road (unless we go up of course  ) because nobody dreamed City would get relegated and the top players have no relegation clauses written in according to Sky Sports
Get ready to welcome Enzo Fernandez that would be a fun experience |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 06:42 - Oct 1 with 753 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
The next round of TV rights bidding for the PL might be interesting. Starts in 2028, so about 18 months.
The rate of monetary increase in the bidding had already slowed down due to saturation and now we have a competition that is tarnished with corruption and cheating. | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 07:22 - Oct 1 with 688 views | Northernr |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:25 - Sep 30 by ManinBlack |
I did say after that City game that I was unimpressed that we had fans celebrating a winning goal against us. That was a game we should have stopped City winning the league and the kudos we would have got from that. I said at the time City would go and dominate and all we would have done is temporarily delay them winning the Premiership. It was clear with their state funding they would be financial giants buying all the trophies. I get that people hated Man Utd that day but I said after that game that in time people would come to hate City too. I was right about that looking at what fans of other clubs have to say about them.
Anyway can someone wake me up when the 3-2 defeat that day gets overturned for cheating... |
The context of the Cantona goal and the Ashley Young penalty farce is important here. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 07:55 - Oct 1 with 638 views | daveB |
| Man City - GUILTY on 21:25 - Sep 30 by ManinBlack |
I did say after that City game that I was unimpressed that we had fans celebrating a winning goal against us. That was a game we should have stopped City winning the league and the kudos we would have got from that. I said at the time City would go and dominate and all we would have done is temporarily delay them winning the Premiership. It was clear with their state funding they would be financial giants buying all the trophies. I get that people hated Man Utd that day but I said after that game that in time people would come to hate City too. I was right about that looking at what fans of other clubs have to say about them.
Anyway can someone wake me up when the 3-2 defeat that day gets overturned for cheating... |
I think a lot of the celebrations were more about us staying up, the way they won it was incredible though so was hard not to feel pleased for their fans rather than the club. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:26 - Oct 1 with 567 views | DWQPR |
Looking at the figures and the amounts that they have been topped up to be honest given that in the years in question I would have expected Citeh to receive the amount that they claimed to have received during that period. £900 odd million sounds about right when you consider ground d sponsorship, kit sponsorship, advertising, shirt sponsorship, women’s team sponsors etc. certainly surely these weren’t worth just over £100 million during this period. Especially when Stoke seem to get away with their ground being sponsored for over £10million a season by an associated business when they have been nothing more than the wart on the arsè of the championship for the last decade?
PSR as the example given by Clive about shirt sponsorship shows that it is there to protect the bigger clubs against the smaller ones. How can any panel judge that a team like ManUre should have higher sponsorship rights than a smaller club competing in the same competition. In their summary of Citeh’s misdemeanours it states about keeping the integrity of the competition and making it fair for all clubs! Yeah right. I do have some sympathy for Citeh but they went about things the wrong way and should have mounted a legal challenge against the PL over anti-competition rules. | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:29 - Oct 1 with 550 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Man City - GUILTY on 18:40 - Sep 30 by Northernr |
There's another point I've seen made today that let's say QPR get to the Premier League, and let's say I as a fan want to give them £50m to put Loftforwords.co.uk as the front shirt sponsor (Patreon's had a good month). I'm not allowed to do it, because it's not "fair market rate". But if I want to give Man Utd £50m to put it on their shirt, that would be fine. |
That's one of the best uses of irony I've seen in a long while!
And yet, it's the sight of the ugly moaning moosh of Fernandes waiting to take a pen, with the shirt sponsorship taking centre stage that has me chuckling.
Only you and your mates Jeff, Zuck, and Elon could have dreamt that up. |  |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:39 - Oct 1 with 514 views | Northernr |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:29 - Oct 1 by PlanetHonneywood |
That's one of the best uses of irony I've seen in a long while!
And yet, it's the sight of the ugly moaning moosh of Fernandes waiting to take a pen, with the shirt sponsorship taking centre stage that has me chuckling.
Only you and your mates Jeff, Zuck, and Elon could have dreamt that up. |
Believe me, if I was in charge of the Man Utd shirt sponsorship it would say something very different. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:44 - Oct 1 with 489 views | PlanetHonneywood |
| Man City - GUILTY on 19:03 - Sep 30 by priceyparkrangers |
The PM has come out to defend them. Shocking!! (Source is sky sports news)
Prime Minister Andy Burnham says he would be “really concerned" if Manchester City's owners decide to sell up after the club was found guilty of Premier League financial rule breaches.
Burnham also said it would be wrong to “leap to judgment” about Man City, and he is confident his dealings with the club while mayor of Greater Manchester stand up to scrutiny.
He said the club, found guilty of charges related to breaches of financial rules between 2009/10 and 2017/18, should be able to “contest the situation if they don’t think it’s fair”.
The Prime Minister thanked City Football Group – the club’s holding company – for the money it had invested into Manchester, but said he would “keep my distance” should the United Arab Emirates government make representations to him over the dispute.
Asked if he was worried about them selling the club, he told the BBC: “I would be really concerned to lose them. They’ve been such a huge partner in the building of modern Manchester.
“Obviously, the building of Manchester City into the global force that it is.” |
Thought Burnham was spot on, handled it well, and given all the dynamics here, handled it as he had to.
The real issue here is about governmental ownership and thus, potential interference. If the UAE, Etihad and Emirati sponsors start getting involved (the last two are essentiallythe government), they're basically trying to use their influence to let City get away with cheating. Simple fact is: what we consider wrong isn't seen in the same way in other parts of the world.
Which is why when you have laws, rules, and standards, then you either stick to them or you might as well throw them out the door! Whether you're a Brit, tubby Malay, Yank, Qatari, Emirati, then these are the rules and if you don't like them, fck off!!
Otherwise the next thing you know: you'll have some tinpot dictator shitting his nappy because his favourite player was sent off and rings his chum up, who just happens to be the head man to reverse the red card, despite it's merits. If we ever got to that stage, then it's truly fuc.....oh!!!! | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:57 - Oct 1 with 440 views | KensalT |
That link didn't work for me.
Says "Page not found" | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:04 - Oct 1 with 420 views | dm97 |
City fans and ex staff etc are just in denial. The reasonable ones, over time, will see it for what it is and then come to terms with what the ownership have do e. And the chronically online fans who want to believe in some conspiracy that they see on X are beyond reach anyway.
As many have pointed out, prisons are literally full of criminals who, despite all the evidence needed to lock them up, deny their guilt up to the day they’re released. This isn’t anything special psychologically, it’s just a coping mechanism |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:05 - Oct 1 with 419 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:44 - Oct 1 by PlanetHonneywood |
Thought Burnham was spot on, handled it well, and given all the dynamics here, handled it as he had to.
The real issue here is about governmental ownership and thus, potential interference. If the UAE, Etihad and Emirati sponsors start getting involved (the last two are essentiallythe government), they're basically trying to use their influence to let City get away with cheating. Simple fact is: what we consider wrong isn't seen in the same way in other parts of the world.
Which is why when you have laws, rules, and standards, then you either stick to them or you might as well throw them out the door! Whether you're a Brit, tubby Malay, Yank, Qatari, Emirati, then these are the rules and if you don't like them, fck off!!
Otherwise the next thing you know: you'll have some tinpot dictator shitting his nappy because his favourite player was sent off and rings his chum up, who just happens to be the head man to reverse the red card, despite it's merits. If we ever got to that stage, then it's truly fuc.....oh!!!! |
Burnham was in a tricky position.
As the former Mayor of Manchester many City voters will have voted for him in the past, he's probably on first name terms with the suits at City, and looking beyond football the club owners have invested heavily in the urban regeneration of Manchester.
So he could hardly dump on them.
That said, I thought his response suggested a bit too much sympathy for the City owners. Saying we shouldn't rush to judgement when the City owners have been stalling the process for years and have had a twelve week hearing with ample opportunity to make their case does look a bit weak from Burnham.
But to be fair it's a tightrope he's walking.
100% agree that we should not allow sovereign states to own clubs in our national sport. [Post edited 1 Oct 9:05]
| | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:07 - Oct 1 with 410 views | Northernr |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:04 - Oct 1 by dm97 |
City fans and ex staff etc are just in denial. The reasonable ones, over time, will see it for what it is and then come to terms with what the ownership have do e. And the chronically online fans who want to believe in some conspiracy that they see on X are beyond reach anyway.
As many have pointed out, prisons are literally full of criminals who, despite all the evidence needed to lock them up, deny their guilt up to the day they’re released. This isn’t anything special psychologically, it’s just a coping mechanism |
It's a bit of an eye opener all these CityNews, CityCentral etc social media accounts when you click on them and look at their location... | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:17 - Oct 1 with 380 views | Konk |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:07 - Oct 1 by Northernr |
It's a bit of an eye opener all these CityNews, CityCentral etc social media accounts when you click on them and look at their location... |
I’m gonna guess it’s not Moss Side or Levenshulme... is it Stockport? |  |
| Fulham FC: It's the taking part that counts |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.