PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Gorton_Tubster]

Utd fans rthink it is to benefit City, so we can get away with the charges.. I forget how many there are. But this little gem on redcafe is going to get deleted soon I reckon

44 minutes ago

• 
  
• #16

Grundig​

New Member​

Newbie
Joined Mar 25, 2024Messages 3
I think we have to understand one thing. It is not City who are running PL and Masters, it is United. Ratcliffe knows very well, after long discussions with Berrada that there is no chance at all that City are quilty. Therefore these changes to make it possible for United to invest in the summer transfer window. Without these changes United are up deep shit creeks when it comes to PSR.

 

[flook]

Stand strong is very positive. Definitely worth a read. Can’t make out the rest of the txt tho. Maybe it’s a montage of our league one days.

F365 have had us guilty as charged from day 1 in everything I've seen from them, I'm not clicking the link to see if that's changed here (I suspect not given the reference to league 1) but if it has then it's another strong indicator of incoming absolution

 

[domalino]

F365 have had us guilty as charged from day 1 in everything I've seen from them, I'm not clicking the link to see if that's changed here (I suspect not given the reference to league 1) but if it has then it's another strong indicator of incoming absolution

F365 have not really had an opinion on our charges.

Fans who write into F365's letters to the editor articles do.

 

[Centurions]

Not much chance - Keegan reckons 17 are in favour of some of it.

Which again is no surprise - my first thoughts (which may be wrong)
- have access to the PL cash already, and benefit
- if a club overspends, they have to pay all the other clubs, so free money!
- clubs getting promoted start with less and therefore will overspend more.
- more leeway for overspending to avoid relegation

- more leeway for overspending but does a Chelsea, fails miserably and does get relegated anyway with all of the associated debts and the club gets wound up.

Sounds sustainable to me.

 

[Asa's left peg]

What a shitshow.

 

[domalino]

- more leeway for overspending but does a Chelsea, fails miserably and does get relegated anyway with all of the associated debts and the club gets wound up.

Sounds sustainable to me.

Do you actually think Chelsea are at risk of getting wound up?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

IMO the way to fix that potential problem is either:

1) The EFL adopts the same measures and then the relegated PL clubs would have to cut back their costs massively or end up paying loads of money to their rivals, or

2)By eliminating parachute payments and the EFL not adopting the tax system, clubs like Leicester City this year on 116% wages to turnover would have to completely gut their Premier League quality team and get out of the Championship with a Championship side or else face a huge points deduction like they are this season.

Option 2 would mean no more Norwich, Leicester, West Brom musical chairs.

I'm not sure what would work that wouldn't largely detach the PL from the EFL. I know it's almost in place anyway, but I think it's a bad thing for the game - the PL shouldn't be allowed to 'own' the English league game.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Because we don't actually want a league which has massive financial disparity. Teams that cost £1000m playing teams that cost £60m does not produce great football. You just end up with 1 team parking 11 behind the ball, wasting time from kick off and making nasty cycnical fouls.

We're already bringing in the 70% rule, Luxury tax means clubs like Villa, Leicester, West Ham can spend outside of their means, but there's a price to it which keeps teams like Luton or Burnley competitive.

Sporting sanctions obviously have to be invovled because you've got to have a limit. It's fine someone paying a tax for spending 80% one year or 110% for 3 years, but unless you have a hard ceiling then someone is going to try and spend 500% of revenue without ever bothering to increase their turnover to make it sustainable.

Fair points, well made.

But I suppose it depends what you think these new rules are being proposed to prevent, or to encourage, I suppose.

They were introduced to ensure financial sustainability and some degree of financial prudence as I understand it. Not some idea of ensuring equality of competition. If they were, they have failed miserably and, in any case, there are much better ways of doing it, some from the dreaded USA.

If we pretend they are to allow new clubs to be able to enter the elite with investment, why punish them with fines if it is sustainable?

If, as is more likely in my view, like all other changes and no matter how the principles are dressed up, the detail will be formed to get the existing "elite" out of their PSR hole and then protect them from more competition, then tbh I would prefer to keep things just how they are for a while longer so some of the bigger fish get caught in the net of their stupid rules.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

F365 have not really had an opinion on our charges.

Fans who write into F365's letters to the editor articles do.

That's my opinion too.
There's the likes of Ford who writes pieces to stir fans up, and they duly get stirred up. They overdid things, I think, last week.

The editor is an Arsenal fan, the only one I know the allegiance of (since Storey moved on).

 

[domalino]

If we pretend they are to allow new clubs to be able to enter the elite with investment, why punish them with fines if it is sustainable?

The tax is what makes it sustainable. It's punishing enough that you can't keep paying it forever (so you have to either reduce spedning or increase growth in the medium to long term), but you can still make calculated decisions to invest and see the profits of that later. The tax brackets go up the more successive eyars you're in breach, and there's a hard cap after which you can't sign new players.


To put this in perspective, the LA Clippers are paying $155m to the other 29 NBA teams this season in taxes to allow them to spend ~$200m on wages instead of the allowed $150m.

But the Miami Heat who are only exceding their cap by a bit ($8m) are only paying $13m.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

- more leeway for overspending but does a Chelsea, fails miserably and does get relegated anyway with all of the associated debts and the club gets wound up.

Sounds sustainable to me.

I don't see that Chelsea are in any danger of being wound up. They are still worth a vast amount.

Their PSR/FFP issue is their problem, so I expect they want the rules changed. It doesn't reflect the overall club value.

 

[KS55]

And also scrapping the related-party sponsors and sister club rules.

Funny that, with United and Liverpool now looking to start their own multi-club models?

They had to invent a new category “associated” when they realised our AbuDhabi based sponsors were not related under IAS 24. The definition was a bit like “did you meet an exec of your sponsor on your hols? It’s associated then.”
A useless organisation, run by idiots doing the bidding of the redshirts.

 

[flook]

F365 have not really had an opinion on our charges.

Fans who write into F365's letters to the editor articles do.

See, you've made me go there now

Man City expulsion? FFP punishments ranked by how much it will impact Pep Guardiola's side

The pitch forks are out amid fresh 'expulsion' claims as we await the verdict on Manchester City's alleged 115 breaches of FFP. How will they feel about their potential sanctions?

www.football365.com

Man City 'expulsion' is 'on the table' for 'the first time' as 52-page document is released amid 'farce' claims

Potential "expulsion" is now "on the table" for Man City "for the first time" if they are found guilty of their financial charges, Keith Wyness suggests.

www.football365.com

Man City FFP 'expulsion' leads £78m star to Arsenal as Barcelona beat Real Madrid to midfielder

The FFP trial has finally begun and we've reassigned the Man City players on the assumption that they will be dumped from the Premier League.

www.football365.com

just from 2 minutes looking

 

[Centurions]

Do you actually think Chelsea are at risk of getting wound up?

I don't see that Chelsea are in any danger of being wound up. They are still worth a vast amount.

Their PSR/FFP issue is their problem, so I expect they want the rules changed. It doesn't reflect the overall club value.

I meant in terms of spending crazy amounts in order to dominate the league (or at least get into the CL).

 

[Maly]

American architect company, Flemways

How very apt for the scousers :)

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

American architect company, Flemways

You can tell it’s American.

It’d be Phlegmweighs if it were from the U.K..

 

[Chappie]

How very apt for the scousers :)

You have to be clever or obtuse to understand that,which bracket do you fit into?

 

[KS55]

If this goes through, it’ll help any clubs wanting to accelerate their rise to the top 6 in the PL.

Clubs in Europe will still need to abide by UEFA PSR rules, but ones not in it yet can spend what they like and pay the PL luxury tax.

My version of that was: “They can spend what they like, subject only to a maximum debt rule”. The need to not double up on UEFA rules is clear.

 

[abu13]

The comments on the Daily Fail Keegan article are hilarious. City bingo on steroids. Forgetting the rival fans outraged bollocks nonsense that “city are getting away with it” they do seem to be lurching towards accepting City will not be punished/relegated etc from the charges - apparently because the Sheikh has bribed everyone involved ! Lovely.

This is the argument i love having with our detractors, basically they are accusing us of dodgy dealing and off the record payments. They have been and continue to demand investigations to try and uncover the evidence but cant find any. And then we are expected to believe the very people who want us charged for dodgy accounting have been bought off with backhanders.

In reality if this was the case all it would take is for one person to come forward as a whistleblower and we would be bang to rights and tarnished forever.

Funny how nobody ever has done isnt it :)

 

[KS55]

I assume it has no bearing on our case as the rules at the time will continue to apply.

Not if the PL can help it.