| Man City - GUILTY 14:45 - Sep 25 with 36376 views | Northernr |
On all charges. Punishment? Errrrr, haven't decided yet.
|  | | |  |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:22 - Sep 30 with 1594 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 07:45 - Sep 30 by Dorse |
City's 'Disguised Funding Scheme' has been right in front of us all along.
DFS Sale NOW ON.
We're through the looking glass here people. |
So they found the money down the back of the sofa! [Post edited 30 Sep 9:44]
|  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:28 - Sep 30 with 1557 views | Maggsinho |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:22 - Sep 30 by KensalT |
So they found the money down the back of the sofa! [Post edited 30 Sep 9:44]
|
There's some City fan yelling 'I'm Spartacus!" at the moment. |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 09:32 - Sep 30 with 1515 views | Watford_Ranger |
Saw it described as The Pepstein Files which made me chuckle |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 10:01 - Sep 30 with 1402 views | EastR |
| Man City - GUILTY on 18:46 - Sep 29 by Northernr |
The story Birmingham are telling, for instance, has never added up to me. Again, a new and rich owner pumping money in claiming absolutely ridiculous levels of revenue to justify it. They've had one limited series doc appear on Amazon Prime, otherwise they're the same shtshow Championship club they've always been.
Wrexham - you can see it. Multiple Disney series, United Airlines sponsorships, US tours etc etc. Birmingham I've been wondering about for a while. |
Interesting that when the US investors came into Birmingham that they immediately moved to appoint Garry C®ook who was CEO at Man City when all these shenanigans started. Come over here, show us how it’s done. | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 10:27 - Sep 30 with 1336 views | Juzzie |
| Man City - GUILTY on 07:13 - Sep 30 by MedwayR |
These shady workarounds wouldn’t be required if FFP/PSR hadn’t been brought in. Owners have always been allowed to spend but now it’s suddenly an evil in the game. The football authorities have brought in a system & rules that they can’t actually implement, what a mess. |
It's been an evil in the game for decades. Blackburn were bank-rolled to success by their wealthy owner and everyone cried 'foul'.
So, what do we do... let it be a free-for-all where a clubs success is based on how much money their owner is willing to spend whilst it completely distorts reasonable competition and player transfer fees & salaries or do we try and find a level playing field.
Most people I think were for the latter but it's clearly been something quite difficult to actually carry out as people will just find a way to bend the rules, legitimately or otherwise. |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 10:56 - Sep 30 with 1228 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
| Man City - GUILTY on 08:37 - Sep 30 by slmrstid |
From an accountancy professional point of view...I have to wonder where the club's auditors were in all of this.
This isn't just cheating to get around League financial rules - this is fraud. This is the sort of thing that has taken business' down and seen people serving prison time for.
Audits aren't guaranteed to find and prevent all fraud...but numbers and arrangements of this magnitude shouldn't have gone undetected for so long.
Quite possibly some audit partners sweating a bit this morning. I'm sure HMRC are taking an interest in some of the staffing payment arrangements too, Mancini's disguised employment income etc. |
Just like auditors when the financial crisis happened back in 2008. Sunning themselves on a yacht while Rome burns. And no one went to prison. | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:03 - Sep 30 with 1219 views | NorthantsHoop |
Is this the start of the potential collapse of top tier football and the massive re-balancing that is so sorely needed, probably not but you never know. The protectionism at the top of the game is beyond belief, whether anything really changes from Man City's potential fall from grace remains to be seeen. Think we sort of all know that this whole murky World of football finance that has gone on really uncontrolled for decades but has been accelerated when the Premier League started in the early 90s, genie was let out of the bottle and it won't go back in. There is cheating and there is cheating, but as we know most of it goes on off the field in the beautiful game. |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:09 - Sep 30 with 1190 views | Northernr |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:03 - Sep 30 by NorthantsHoop |
Is this the start of the potential collapse of top tier football and the massive re-balancing that is so sorely needed, probably not but you never know. The protectionism at the top of the game is beyond belief, whether anything really changes from Man City's potential fall from grace remains to be seeen. Think we sort of all know that this whole murky World of football finance that has gone on really uncontrolled for decades but has been accelerated when the Premier League started in the early 90s, genie was let out of the bottle and it won't go back in. There is cheating and there is cheating, but as we know most of it goes on off the field in the beautiful game. |
Sadly I think it's only going to increase the protectionism at the very top i.e. Man Utd, Liverpool and to a certain extent Arsenal. The clubs that get screwed on these things are the ones who try and challenge - City, Forest, Villa, even our good selves. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:27 - Sep 30 with 1134 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:03 - Sep 30 by NorthantsHoop |
Is this the start of the potential collapse of top tier football and the massive re-balancing that is so sorely needed, probably not but you never know. The protectionism at the top of the game is beyond belief, whether anything really changes from Man City's potential fall from grace remains to be seeen. Think we sort of all know that this whole murky World of football finance that has gone on really uncontrolled for decades but has been accelerated when the Premier League started in the early 90s, genie was let out of the bottle and it won't go back in. There is cheating and there is cheating, but as we know most of it goes on off the field in the beautiful game. |
There was a piece the other day (I think it was Simon Kuper in the FT) where he said that Calciopoli in Italy was the start of the decline of Serie A and that financial scandal here could do similar damage to the PL.
I think the difference is that Juventus are the financial powerhouse of Italian football Relegating them and stripping their titles did damage to the whole game over there. But in the PL there's a small circle of elite clubs. Inflicting huge reputational and possibly financial damage to one isn't going to hurt the others or the overall global standing of the league. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:31 - Sep 30 with 1122 views | Northernr |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:27 - Sep 30 by KensalT |
There was a piece the other day (I think it was Simon Kuper in the FT) where he said that Calciopoli in Italy was the start of the decline of Serie A and that financial scandal here could do similar damage to the PL.
I think the difference is that Juventus are the financial powerhouse of Italian football Relegating them and stripping their titles did damage to the whole game over there. But in the PL there's a small circle of elite clubs. Inflicting huge reputational and possibly financial damage to one isn't going to hurt the others or the overall global standing of the league. |
I've long said this about the total absence of players failing drug tests - it would damage the product.
In a world where there are drug cheats in golf, shooting, archery etc the idea that everybody is clean in an increasingly athletic and endurance-based sport like football is nuts. And yet apart from the odd dopey young lad with cocaine, nobody ever fails the tests. Because if they did, it would become like cycling, or Olympic sprinting, where every time somebody goes faster than ever before (or scores more goals) many people would just shrug and assume they're doped up to the eyeballs.
It's not a good product to sell to the public if the first assumption is it's all rigged/cheating. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:58 - Sep 30 with 1045 views | KensalT |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:31 - Sep 30 by Northernr |
I've long said this about the total absence of players failing drug tests - it would damage the product.
In a world where there are drug cheats in golf, shooting, archery etc the idea that everybody is clean in an increasingly athletic and endurance-based sport like football is nuts. And yet apart from the odd dopey young lad with cocaine, nobody ever fails the tests. Because if they did, it would become like cycling, or Olympic sprinting, where every time somebody goes faster than ever before (or scores more goals) many people would just shrug and assume they're doped up to the eyeballs.
It's not a good product to sell to the public if the first assumption is it's all rigged/cheating. |
True dat.
But the public are very willing to suspend disbelief, for at least for as long as it takes for the truth to come out.
In America they now talk about the late 80's to early 2000's in baseball as the "steroids era", but no one was asking questions when Babe Ruth's decades old record for home runs was being taken apart not just once but year after year.
People want to believe, right up to the point where someone exposes the truth.
Maybe that's the strongest card City have left. Take us down and we'll start talking about where the bodies are buried.
Might be a good thing for the likes of us if the big boys did start tearing each other apart. Which is sadly why it probably won't happen.
EDIT - I think Ruth's record was beaten once in the early sixties, but aside from that no one had come close to it for over 60 years, then it was suddenly being beaten every season. When something looks too good to be true........... [Post edited 30 Sep 12:29]
| | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 12:20 - Sep 30 with 976 views | daveB |
| Man City - GUILTY on 23:28 - Sep 29 by BrianMcCarthy |
I wonder about this too.
It will be interesting to see how many clubs really chase City over this, and how many back off. There may well be a number of Premier League clubs who won't want a broader investigation into Premier League clubs as a whole. There may well be a number of them who won't want to set a precedent for a big punishment, lest the knock comes on their door. |
They are all at it, selling womens teams to pass the threshold, selling grounds to yourself.
It's all quite mad. A set of unworkable rules brought in forcing clubs to regularly cheat to pass them and I'm not sure any good has come out of it.
It's like Var having to change things every season when the rules they brought in go wrong, they could just scrap it but they keep doubling down
That doesn't mean City shouldn't have the book thrown at them but the rules have always been ridiculous |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 12:39 - Sep 30 with 906 views | Clive_Anderson |
| Man City - GUILTY on 12:20 - Sep 30 by daveB |
They are all at it, selling womens teams to pass the threshold, selling grounds to yourself.
It's all quite mad. A set of unworkable rules brought in forcing clubs to regularly cheat to pass them and I'm not sure any good has come out of it.
It's like Var having to change things every season when the rules they brought in go wrong, they could just scrap it but they keep doubling down
That doesn't mean City shouldn't have the book thrown at them but the rules have always been ridiculous |
Yes and is selling things to yourself really that much better? It also separates clubs from their assets which is what the rules were supposed to prevent.
And since when is it not allowed to invest in a business? I can see City challenging the whole FFP rules under competition law. There is no way they are going to just back down and accept any punishment.
Crazy how Man Utd owners can extract as much money out of them as they can and leave the ground to rot no problemo, but actually investing in the club is not allowed. [Post edited 30 Sep 12:39]
| | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 12:44 - Sep 30 with 894 views | PlanetHonneywood |
We can but imagine the backdoor shenanigans going on.
Illegality is one thing, but one wonders if the relevant authorities are looking into the potential criminality of the various actors involved here? If I were the auditors, I'd sure as sh1t have my lawyers on speed dial!
This is a real test for the 'integrity' of the PL/the game, and given City's first game after the IB is at Anfield, I can'twait to hear what the scouse wit will come up with. |  |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:33 - Sep 30 with 804 views | NorthantsHoop |
The EFL if they have the balls should continue hard line to drive a better deal with the Premier League on the 10 year solidarity payment negotiations that are currently stalled,maybe all the Man City stuff is a part of why things are held up. Think the offer so far is well below what the Prem league can afford to pass down the chain. But as we know you can't let the little people get too big it might upset the big boys too much and their entitlement to get their hands on the vast pot of money that washes up into their hands, while the rest of the football pyramid fights for scraps from their table. [Post edited 30 Sep 13:37]
| | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:35 - Sep 30 with 796 views | TK1 |
| Man City - GUILTY on 10:27 - Sep 30 by Juzzie |
It's been an evil in the game for decades. Blackburn were bank-rolled to success by their wealthy owner and everyone cried 'foul'.
So, what do we do... let it be a free-for-all where a clubs success is based on how much money their owner is willing to spend whilst it completely distorts reasonable competition and player transfer fees & salaries or do we try and find a level playing field.
Most people I think were for the latter but it's clearly been something quite difficult to actually carry out as people will just find a way to bend the rules, legitimately or otherwise. |
QPR were bankrolled beyond its means to very moderate eventual success and then significant, lasting failure by first Briatore/Ecclestone/Bhatia (Mittal) and then the ludicrous moneybags clown show of Fernandes/Gnanalingam/Bhatia (Mittal). All substantially wealthier than Walker.
We massively overspent, bought terribly, grossly broke financial rules. Where did it get QPR? Now we talk not of buying world class players as we did at the dawn of both those eras - we instead we dream of developing players and then selling them for profit. Like Bournemouth, Brighton or Brentford. How mad would that have sounded in 2008? Through the looking glass.
Money *guarantees* nothing.
Owners should spend what they wish. FFP/PSR is a racket designed just to protect the top three or four clubs. It hasn't helped control transfer fees, nor wages, nor ticket prices, nor saved clubs down the pyramid, hasn't prevented clubs being billions in debt. It has not levelled the playing field at all. None of its reasoning for being is in place. Throw it in the bin.
BUT ownership needs/needed vastly stronger controls. Too late now. But...
Nation states should not own British football clubs. US corporate multi-sport entities should not own British football clubs. Chinese, Far East billionaire speculators should not own British football clubs. Non-dom Bond villains should not own British football clubs. I'm sorry but Malaysian shipping magnets should not own British football clubs.
British football invited vast nation state-sized wealth into its sport, people with zero attachment to the clubs, but - for whatever reason in each case - a keen need to win. Then it imposed spending limits on them. If anyone thinks that Abu Dhabi alone flaunted what they deem these piddling restrictions is in for a shock.
The PL will be forced to impose huge sanctions if this document stands up as it can be read - shell companies with AI stock photos for CEOs, etc. But the Abu Dhabi royal family and men like Al Mubarak, Shiek Mansour are not going to meekly accept humiliation. They will not accept defeat. They're embedded in Britain, especially in Burnham's Manchester. Watching that Soriano video would no doubt have shaken the PL...it could get very dark, very quickly.
It's not just about Man City. I think it's potentially existential for the Premier League. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:53 - Sep 30 with 742 views | TheChef |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:09 - Sep 30 by Northernr |
Sadly I think it's only going to increase the protectionism at the very top i.e. Man Utd, Liverpool and to a certain extent Arsenal. The clubs that get screwed on these things are the ones who try and challenge - City, Forest, Villa, even our good selves. |
And that protectionism will include City getting a very light punishment (or as mentioned, with any appeal, will get dragged out a few more years yet). |  |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:56 - Sep 30 with 734 views | JamesB1979 |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:35 - Sep 30 by TK1 |
QPR were bankrolled beyond its means to very moderate eventual success and then significant, lasting failure by first Briatore/Ecclestone/Bhatia (Mittal) and then the ludicrous moneybags clown show of Fernandes/Gnanalingam/Bhatia (Mittal). All substantially wealthier than Walker.
We massively overspent, bought terribly, grossly broke financial rules. Where did it get QPR? Now we talk not of buying world class players as we did at the dawn of both those eras - we instead we dream of developing players and then selling them for profit. Like Bournemouth, Brighton or Brentford. How mad would that have sounded in 2008? Through the looking glass.
Money *guarantees* nothing.
Owners should spend what they wish. FFP/PSR is a racket designed just to protect the top three or four clubs. It hasn't helped control transfer fees, nor wages, nor ticket prices, nor saved clubs down the pyramid, hasn't prevented clubs being billions in debt. It has not levelled the playing field at all. None of its reasoning for being is in place. Throw it in the bin.
BUT ownership needs/needed vastly stronger controls. Too late now. But...
Nation states should not own British football clubs. US corporate multi-sport entities should not own British football clubs. Chinese, Far East billionaire speculators should not own British football clubs. Non-dom Bond villains should not own British football clubs. I'm sorry but Malaysian shipping magnets should not own British football clubs.
British football invited vast nation state-sized wealth into its sport, people with zero attachment to the clubs, but - for whatever reason in each case - a keen need to win. Then it imposed spending limits on them. If anyone thinks that Abu Dhabi alone flaunted what they deem these piddling restrictions is in for a shock.
The PL will be forced to impose huge sanctions if this document stands up as it can be read - shell companies with AI stock photos for CEOs, etc. But the Abu Dhabi royal family and men like Al Mubarak, Shiek Mansour are not going to meekly accept humiliation. They will not accept defeat. They're embedded in Britain, especially in Burnham's Manchester. Watching that Soriano video would no doubt have shaken the PL...it could get very dark, very quickly.
It's not just about Man City. I think it's potentially existential for the Premier League. |
We overspent and breached the rules but I don’t think we tried to hide anything or mislead the regulators? | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:30 - Sep 30 with 646 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:56 - Sep 30 by JamesB1979 |
We overspent and breached the rules but I don’t think we tried to hide anything or mislead the regulators? |
We found a letter in a desk drawer :) |  |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:34 - Sep 30 with 629 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:35 - Sep 30 by TK1 |
QPR were bankrolled beyond its means to very moderate eventual success and then significant, lasting failure by first Briatore/Ecclestone/Bhatia (Mittal) and then the ludicrous moneybags clown show of Fernandes/Gnanalingam/Bhatia (Mittal). All substantially wealthier than Walker.
We massively overspent, bought terribly, grossly broke financial rules. Where did it get QPR? Now we talk not of buying world class players as we did at the dawn of both those eras - we instead we dream of developing players and then selling them for profit. Like Bournemouth, Brighton or Brentford. How mad would that have sounded in 2008? Through the looking glass.
Money *guarantees* nothing.
Owners should spend what they wish. FFP/PSR is a racket designed just to protect the top three or four clubs. It hasn't helped control transfer fees, nor wages, nor ticket prices, nor saved clubs down the pyramid, hasn't prevented clubs being billions in debt. It has not levelled the playing field at all. None of its reasoning for being is in place. Throw it in the bin.
BUT ownership needs/needed vastly stronger controls. Too late now. But...
Nation states should not own British football clubs. US corporate multi-sport entities should not own British football clubs. Chinese, Far East billionaire speculators should not own British football clubs. Non-dom Bond villains should not own British football clubs. I'm sorry but Malaysian shipping magnets should not own British football clubs.
British football invited vast nation state-sized wealth into its sport, people with zero attachment to the clubs, but - for whatever reason in each case - a keen need to win. Then it imposed spending limits on them. If anyone thinks that Abu Dhabi alone flaunted what they deem these piddling restrictions is in for a shock.
The PL will be forced to impose huge sanctions if this document stands up as it can be read - shell companies with AI stock photos for CEOs, etc. But the Abu Dhabi royal family and men like Al Mubarak, Shiek Mansour are not going to meekly accept humiliation. They will not accept defeat. They're embedded in Britain, especially in Burnham's Manchester. Watching that Soriano video would no doubt have shaken the PL...it could get very dark, very quickly.
It's not just about Man City. I think it's potentially existential for the Premier League. |
I'd go even further: English business people shouldn't own English clubs. Karl Oyston, for one, is English.
I'm with Bazza - 50+1 rule. | |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:35 - Sep 30 with 625 views | LongRanger |
| Man City - GUILTY on 13:56 - Sep 30 by JamesB1979 |
We overspent and breached the rules but I don’t think we tried to hide anything or mislead the regulators? |
Not sure about that, its just very obvious when a club like QPR unveil Green and Cesar as their 2 keepers for starters, hiding in plain sight doesn't work here.
I think the PL are now knees deep and will have to throw all the punishment they can at City, but to me, City look ready to dig in and rip the place down and take every club with them on their way...the impact could be huge. The idea 20 odd clubs and hundreds of players could be lining up to sue them for lost revenue/wages due to missing out on Europe/titles etc, its going to get very ugly [Post edited 30 Sep 14:52]
| | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:43 - Sep 30 with 597 views | Phildo |
| Man City - GUILTY on 11:31 - Sep 30 by Northernr |
I've long said this about the total absence of players failing drug tests - it would damage the product.
In a world where there are drug cheats in golf, shooting, archery etc the idea that everybody is clean in an increasingly athletic and endurance-based sport like football is nuts. And yet apart from the odd dopey young lad with cocaine, nobody ever fails the tests. Because if they did, it would become like cycling, or Olympic sprinting, where every time somebody goes faster than ever before (or scores more goals) many people would just shrug and assume they're doped up to the eyeballs.
It's not a good product to sell to the public if the first assumption is it's all rigged/cheating. |
Totally unrelated I am sure but Pep failed two drug tests for nandrolone while a player and was suspended and sanctioned. They were eventually overturned in the courts. Also unrelated while he was at Bayern the entire medical team resigned. |  | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:50 - Sep 30 with 564 views | kensalriser |
I can't really see the argument they're going to get away with a light punishment.
The depth and breadth of the charges is unprecedented, and City are still denying and contesting it all. The PL is going to have to levy serious punishment, otherwise the whole thing is a farce, including the PL itself. They'll be tossing away all their credibility and clout for what? |  |
| |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:55 - Sep 30 with 547 views | JamesB1979 |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:35 - Sep 30 by LongRanger |
Not sure about that, its just very obvious when a club like QPR unveil Green and Cesar as their 2 keepers for starters, hiding in plain sight doesn't work here.
I think the PL are now knees deep and will have to throw all the punishment they can at City, but to me, City look ready to dig in and rip the place down and take every club with them on their way...the impact could be huge. The idea 20 odd clubs and hundreds of players could be lining up to sue them for lost revenue/wages due to missing out on Europe/titles etc, its going to get very ugly [Post edited 30 Sep 14:52]
|
It’s not about who we signed though or who they signed. It’s cooking books to boost your revenues to sign these players. We just signed players we couldn’t afford without “cooking” the books. Both wrong but theirs is far worse than ours. And on a ridiculous scale. | | | |
| Man City - GUILTY on 14:59 - Sep 30 with 529 views | francisbowles |
| Man City - GUILTY on 12:39 - Sep 30 by Clive_Anderson |
Yes and is selling things to yourself really that much better? It also separates clubs from their assets which is what the rules were supposed to prevent.
And since when is it not allowed to invest in a business? I can see City challenging the whole FFP rules under competition law. There is no way they are going to just back down and accept any punishment.
Crazy how Man Utd owners can extract as much money out of them as they can and leave the ground to rot no problemo, but actually investing in the club is not allowed. [Post edited 30 Sep 12:39]
|
Isn't it a bit late to start challenging the FFP rules when you signed up to them in February 2013?
Some of these charges predate that anyway. So there must be some false and/or fraudulent practices that cannot be attributed to spending limits. Could some of these be of interest to HMRC? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.