PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

Prestwich_Blue said:
If we'd had FFS/PSR in 2008, we'd have passed easily, even without the allowance for owner investment. After all the allowances for things like depreciation and youth development expenses, I think we'd have shown a profit.

But, as Ivesaid before, in June 2008 we nearly went into administration as we couldn't pay the second instalment on the Sven transfers the previous summer. You have to ask therefore, what is the point of FFP? Because it would have stopped us, Leeds or Portsmouth from going under.
Click to expand...
The sad thing is because of the tribal nature of football, opposition fans failed to heed our warnings about the true nature & intent of FFP/PSR.

Watching SSN earlier, Howe admitted they pulled out of a deal to sign Philips because of the financial restrictions in place.

Ten Dawg says he's abandoned the search for a striker, similar to several other clubs abandoning transfer plans, not because they can't afford it. Not because of debt. But because of this bent FFP/PSR.

How is this supposed to be good for the PL brand? The league is killing itself trying to appease the Red Top Mafia & Spuds.
 
The Stockport Iniesta said:
Things can be made to disappear. Not saying it's happened in this case because I haven't got a clue, but I remember reading an article with Scudamore, he was talking about Leicester some time after they had won the league. He basically said people got very nervous after Leicester won the league. The article then disappeared like a puff of smoke.
Click to expand...
Funny you say that. As a result of this conversation I re-read the articles about the PL CEO leaving and I got the feeling that there had been some alterations. For example, some are now saying she never took the post up, but at the time all stated that she resigned after one month. The articles were not quite as I remembered them. I am sure that at least one of them quoted her to say that certain clubs had too much influence, but it’s not there now. Hmmmm….
 
Last edited:
KS55 said:
Funny you say that. As a result of this conversation I re-read the articles about the PL CEO and I got the feeling that there had been some alterations. They were not quite as I remembered them. Hmmmm….
Click to expand...
Happens all the time. Many websites show last updated time on their articles, I've read articles, including those relating to City and FFP where articles from years ago have last update times of a few weeks ago. Makes you wonder if we really do have a Ninteen Eighty Four Ministry of Truth Scenario where history is literally being rewritten by those in power
 
KS55 said:
Funny you say that. As a result of this conversation I re-read the articles about the PL CEO leaving and I got the feeling that there had been some alterations. For example, some are now saying she never took the post up, but at the time all stated that she resigned after one month. They were not quite as I remembered them. I am sure that at least one of them quoted her to say that certain clubs had too much influence, but it’s not there now. Hmmmm….
Click to expand...

I remember reading that but can’t find it. I’ve even googled her name & interference…. But nothing.

There must be something saved on here.
 
KS55 said:
Funny you say that. As a result of this conversation I re-read the articles about the PL CEO leaving and I got the feeling that there had been some alterations. For example, some are now saying she never took the post up, but at the time all stated that she resigned after one month. The articles were not quite as I remembered them. I am sure that at least one of them quoted her to say that certain clubs had too much influence, but it’s not there now. Hmmmm….
Click to expand...

Maybe something like this?

https://archive.is/S1gFa
 
KS55 said:
Funny you say that. As a result of this conversation I re-read the articles about the PL CEO leaving and I got the feeling that there had been some alterations. For example, some are now saying she never took the post up, but at the time all stated that she resigned after one month. The articles were not quite as I remembered them. I am sure that at least one of them quoted her to say that certain clubs had too much influence, but it’s not there now. Hmmmm….
Click to expand...
I thought it was the other way around. The first articles I saw was she never took the post citing too much influence by certain clubs.

It was the later articles which claimed she resigned after a month, but these were amended to the "never took the post" narrative.

It's not a conspiracy. The great thing about digital is you can make corrections as necessary, whereby with print you're stuck with whatever you have, unless you reprint an amendment. It's why I prefer digital.
 
Last edited:
KS55 said:
Well done, thanks for that. Winter makes it clear why Dinnage left, without being too specific. The article also proves that not everything Winter writes is nonsense!
Click to expand...

I wonder if she expressed concerns like this to the Sports Minister, which is behind this whole IR business and the DCMS bitchiness with Masters over the small clubs remark?
 
cheekybids said:
The context was that the committee were saying ‘what about City’ & under pressure he described them as smaller clubs. I thought the DCMS were a disgrace & if that’s all they’ve taken from the meeting you may as well hand it over to Talksport.

Never thought I’d defend that prick Masters but that panel was wank!
Click to expand...
I have to much time on my hands because I sat and watched the whole session.

Andy Burnham as an Everton supporter has his fingers all over this and he has too much time on his hands clearly he hasn’t much do do with his day job.

I think it was Damien Green who asked a very much loaded question trying to infer that City weren’t being treated the same way as Forest and Everton ( all trod very carefully re our potential charges )

Masters response was along the lines big clubs were treated the same as small clubs. He actually didn’t mention Forest or Everton by name.

I personally think that Everton supporters have wound themselves up and must have become infected by some sort of victim mentality.

Bear in mind that the committee were interviewing the PL through Masters and the EFL through Parry.

I personally believe that it’s a fact that whilst it’s difficult to say how you measure the size of a football club it’s a fact and we all accept that some clubs are bigger than others. Despite what Everton fans think at this point in time they are not by any measure the size of say Liverpool or City, or Arsenal and maybe it’s my bias Chelsea.

But no it’s all about Everton supporter ego they argue they are a big club and of course they are bigger than Bournemouth or Brentford and of course Salford or FGR so let’s accept they are a big club .

So let’s agree everyone accepts that they and Forest are big clubs. So Masters was right wasnt he ?

That Committee was an absolute shambles they were playing to the crowd with extremely naive questions for instance one of their number talked about Woman’s football she wanted equality but when it came to Parry’s answer she quite simply hadn’t though through the implication of her suggestion.

The biggest fear for me, and I know some thing a football regulator is a good thing , is that these clowns would certainly be involved in the operations of a regulator and love it or hate it at least what we have now to a large degree is an organisation run by the clubs .
 
Going back to the Ceferin interview in the Telegraph it's clear that it was part of the increasingly strident campaign by senior executives and writers against the Redbird takeover. There are multiple articles a day all vigorously against it & not even a single one ever supporting it. As an example of where they are this is the cartoon in today's edition:


1000035406.jpg
 
terraloon said:
I have to much time on my hands because I sat and watched the whole session.

Andy Burnham as an Everton supporter has his fingers all over this and he has too much time on his hands clearly he hasn’t much do do with his day job.

I think it was Damien Green who asked a very much loaded question trying to infer that City weren’t being treated the same way as Forest and Everton ( all trod very carefully re our potential charges )

Masters response was along the lines big clubs were treated the same as small clubs. He actually didn’t mention Forest or Everton by name.

I personally think that Everton supporters have wound themselves up and must have become infected by some sort of victim mentality.

Bear in mind that the committee were interviewing the PL through Masters and the EFL through Parry.

I personally believe that it’s a fact that whilst it’s difficult to say how you measure the size of a football club it’s a fact and we all accept that some clubs are bigger than others. Despite what Everton fans think at this point in time they are not by any measure the size of say Liverpool or City, or Arsenal and maybe it’s my bias Chelsea.

But no it’s all about Everton supporter ego they argue they are a big club and of course they are bigger than Bournemouth or Brentford and of course Salford or FGR so let’s accept they are a big club .

So let’s agree everyone accepts that they and Forest are big clubs. So Masters was right wasnt he ?

That Committee was an absolute shambles they were playing to the crowd with extremely naive questions for instance one of their number talked about Woman’s football she wanted equality but when it came to Parry’s answer she quite simply hadn’t though through the implication of her suggestion.

The biggest fear for me, and I know some thing a football regulator is a good thing , is that these clowns would certainly be involved in the operations of a regulator and love it or hate it at least what we have now has to a large degree is an organisation run by the clubs .
Click to expand...

I agree with everything, I also watched it all & thought the only person who left with any credit was Masters & I was watching it to see him burnt.

Every member of the committee had a story about the club they support & yet complained that investigators weren’t independent. You couldn’t make it up.

The madness of Everton fans who keep shouting ‘whatabout City’ & ‘whatabout the big 6’ they are the ones making out they are the little club.

Andy Burnham is a **** & at some point he’ll be found shouting ‘whatabout City’ & he should be run out of town.
 
Invisible Man's Bandage said:
Going back to the Ceferin interview in the Telegraph it's clear that it was part of the increasingly strident campaign by senior executives and writers against the Redbird takeover. There are multiple articles a day all vigorously against it & not even a single one ever supporting it. As an example of where they are this is the cartoon in today's edition:


View attachment 105397
Click to expand...

Racist cunts
 
terraloon said:
I have to much time on my hands because I sat and watched the whole session.

Andy Burnham as an Everton supporter has his fingers all over this and he has too much time on his hands clearly he hasn’t much do do with his day job.

I think it was Damien Green who asked a very much loaded question trying to infer that City weren’t being treated the same way as Forest and Everton ( all trod very carefully re our potential charges )

Masters response was along the lines big clubs were treated the same as small clubs. He actually didn’t mention Forest or Everton by name.

I personally think that Everton supporters have wound themselves up and must have become infected by some sort of victim mentality.

Bear in mind that the committee were interviewing the PL through Masters and the EFL through Parry.

I personally believe that it’s a fact that whilst it’s difficult to say how you measure the size of a football club it’s a fact and we all accept that some clubs are bigger than others. Despite what Everton fans think at this point in time they are not by any measure the size of say Liverpool or City, or Arsenal and maybe it’s my bias Chelsea.

But no it’s all about Everton supporter ego they argue they are a big club and of course they are bigger than Bournemouth or Brentford and of course Salford or FGR so let’s accept they are a big club .

So let’s agree everyone accepts that they and Forest are big clubs. So Masters was right wasnt he ?

That Committee was an absolute shambles they were playing to the crowd with extremely naive questions for instance one of their number talked about Woman’s football she wanted equality but when it came to Parry’s answer she quite simply hadn’t though through the implication of her suggestion.

The biggest fear for me, and I know some thing a football regulator is a good thing , is that these clowns would certainly be involved in the operations of a regulator and love it or hate it at least what we have now to a large degree is an organisation run by the clubs .
Click to expand...
The select committee were pathetic they became tribal quoting my club The issue they need to concentrate on was the relationship between the authorities in football FA, FPL, EFL, Conference etc and representatives of all should have been there The EPL and EFL cant even agree the way going forward The SC should have been bashing their heads together for the greater good of football and pushing for them to get agreement Masters and Parry are out of their depth and its clear that football need a strong regulator unfortunately we will get a weak livered clown
The question I would have asked of Parry is weren't you responsible for creating the EPL designed to suite the red shirts that became a cartel only broken up by the investment in Chelsea and City?
Also tell us about, the cartel's "Project Big Picture" PL version 2 that aimed at even greater control from a few clubs mainly owned by Americans
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top