PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[Edghill OG]

Just seen this on Facebook. We are getting blamed for the 115 beaches now. Some turnip even liked the comment. LOL

With the shite weather we keep having it's only natural people are envious of the 115 beaches... wherever they are. May as well get the blame for those as well.

 

[Xhavenjoe]

With the shite weather we keep having it's only natural people are envious of the 115 beaches... wherever they are. May as well get the blame for those as well.

As Churchill said " We will fight them on the beaches"

 

[Essex blue]

As Churchill said " We will fight them on the beaches"

lol it wasn’t even Churchill but a chap that sounded like him (Norman Shelley) as poor Mr Winston Churchill was a wee bit inebriated at the time!!

 

[yaba daba BLUUUUUE]

the question I always ask 115 shelters is, do People don't realise, Manchester City charges if true are monumentally massive. They're not just breaking Premier league rules, they are breaking the LAWS of many countries. Not only that, it's not just Manchester city who have broken the law, it is many many businesses and organisations. If true, the Premier league's actions would be small change, compared to what governments of many countries would do to all these different players. We are talking about fraud, and conspiracy to defraud by many different groups. Where potentially the legal costs and penalties would run into billions, and bankrupt Sheikh Mansour.

Just ask yourself, the owner is a multibillionaire who has football clubs in over 12 countries. He has businesses throughout the world. Do you really believe such a person's legal teams would have him breaking the law all over the world? Would he really jeopardise billions of pounds worth of investment in such a stupid fashion? Or is it more likely you are kidding yourself because you can't beat us on the playing field?

 

[yaba daba BLUUUUUE]

IF you want a more equal and competitive league, then the problem isn't Blackburn Chelsea Leicester and Manchester City it is the formation of the Premier League.
The football Association league had a policy of the richer clubs subsidising the poorer clubs in order to level the playing field and enhance the production of skilful English football players, (for international playing). The Premier League sold the Premier League to the big clubs on the basis that those with the most success would get the biggest revenues. Those with the most success inevitably will be those that spend the most on players. Of course there will be exceptions to the rule, but generally this is what will happen, and has happened with the Premier League.
I'm a Manchester City fan, who saw all this predicted in 1991 in the Socialist Worker newspaper. That the richest club was going to dominate the league, and so I knew that was going to be united.
Now people are complaining "yes, but Manchester City are absolutely dominating the league and that is ruining it." Well, the only way we can see whether FFP is a solution to that problem is by looking at their effect upon history. So if you remove the titles from all those potentially affected by FFP since 1992 the result is, LFC 4, AFC 7, MUFC 19 PL titles. Proof> https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/877216833655030762 on one occasion Manchester United would have won the Premier league 7 times on the trot in this scenario.
Manchester United winning 19 titles is not competitive. Manchester United winning the league 7 times on the trot is not competitive. No one besides those 3 clubs winning a title is not competitive.
The big spenders like Blackburn Chelsea Manchester City and Leicester should be congratulated for making The Premier League more competitive, and so the best product on the global stage of soccer.
Now if you really care about football AS A SPORT, and not just English football but European football as well, then the solution is get rid of the Premier League. We all know that the Premier League spending power is destroying all the European clubs. Unless you get rid of the Premier league and reintroduce the methods the Football Association used English football will not be a sport, it is a competition to see who can make the most money. Thatcherism. The only other alternative for European clubs to compete with the Premier league is the European Super League

 

[chedinho]

Just listened to the City supporter; he's right, no-one will take a blind bit of notice what we say. So called sports journalists are not intersted in facts.

I like how the 'Udders Field fan thinks it's boring City winning all the time. he should check his own clubs history. Must of been very boring for them in the 20's and 30's winning 3 titles in a row, finishing 2nd 3 times, getting to 5 FA Cup Finals and winning it.

Tbf Huddersfield sold the majority of their team to arsenal
So they could have a go
I bet they were delighted with that.
He’s probably disgusted that the FA changed the rules so that could never happen again.

 

[yaba daba BLUUUUUE]

IF you want a more equal and competitive league, then the problem isn't Blackburn Chelsea Leicester and Manchester City it is the formation of the Premier League.
The football Association league had a policy of the richer clubs subsidising the poorer clubs in order to level the playing field and enhance the production of skilful English football players, (for international playing). The Premier League sold the Premier League to the big clubs on the basis that those with the most success would get the biggest revenues. Those with the most success inevitably will be those that spend the most on players. Of course there will be exceptions to the rule, but generally this is what will happen, and has happened with the Premier League.
I'm a Manchester City fan, who saw all this predicted in 1991 in the Socialist Worker newspaper. That the richest club was going to dominate the league, and so I knew that was going to be united.
Now people are complaining "yes, but Manchester City are absolutely dominating the league and that is ruining it." Well, the only way we can see whether FFP is a solution to that problem is by looking at their effect upon history. So if you remove the titles from all those potentially affected by FFP since 1992 the result is, LFC 4, AFC 7, MUFC 19 PL titles. Proof> https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/877216833655030762 on one occasion Manchester United would have won the Premier league 7 times on the trot in this scenario.
Manchester United winning 19 titles is not competitive. Manchester United winning the league 7 times on the trot is not competitive. No one besides those 3 clubs winning a title is not competitive.
The big spenders like Blackburn Chelsea Manchester City and Leicester should be congratulated for making The Premier League more competitive, and so the best product on the global stage of soccer.
Now if you really care about football AS A SPORT, and not just English football but European football as well, then the solution is get rid of the Premier League. We all know that the Premier League spending power is destroying all the European clubs. Unless you get rid of the Premier league and reintroduce the methods the Football Association used English football will not be a sport, it is a competition to see who can make the most money. Thatcherism. The only other alternative for European clubs to compete with the Premier league is the European Super League

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

yaba daba deja vu

 

[Dodge]

With the shite weather we keep having it's only natural people are envious of the 115 beaches... wherever they are. May as well get the blame for those as well.

If we all stopped recycling in 2,000 years water levels in the Irish Sea will rise enough to sink Liverpool and Manchester will get a beach.

 

[Robinhosthumb!]

If we all stopped recycling in 2,000 years water levels in the Irish Sea will rise enough to sink Liverpool and Manchester will get a beach.

That is tempting

 

[bluemanchester]

IF you want a more equal and competitive league, then the problem isn't Blackburn Chelsea Leicester and Manchester City it is the formation of the Premier League.
The football Association league had a policy of the richer clubs subsidising the poorer clubs in order to level the playing field and enhance the production of skilful English football players, (for international playing). The Premier League sold the Premier League to the big clubs on the basis that those with the most success would get the biggest revenues. Those with the most success inevitably will be those that spend the most on players. Of course there will be exceptions to the rule, but generally this is what will happen, and has happened with the Premier League.
I'm a Manchester City fan, who saw all this predicted in 1991 in the Socialist Worker newspaper. That the richest club was going to dominate the league, and so I knew that was going to be united.
Now people are complaining "yes, but Manchester City are absolutely dominating the league and that is ruining it." Well, the only way we can see whether FFP is a solution to that problem is by looking at their effect upon history. So if you remove the titles from all those potentially affected by FFP since 1992 the result is, LFC 4, AFC 7, MUFC 19 PL titles. Proof> https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/877216833655030762 on one occasion Manchester United would have won the Premier league 7 times on the trot in this scenario.
Manchester United winning 19 titles is not competitive. Manchester United winning the league 7 times on the trot is not competitive. No one besides those 3 clubs winning a title is not competitive.
The big spenders like Blackburn Chelsea Manchester City and Leicester should be congratulated for making The Premier League more competitive, and so the best product on the global stage of soccer.
Now if you really care about football AS A SPORT, and not just English football but European football as well, then the solution is get rid of the Premier League. We all know that the Premier League spending power is destroying all the European clubs. Unless you get rid of the Premier league and reintroduce the methods the Football Association used English football will not be a sport, it is a competition to see who can make the most money. Thatcherism. The only other alternative for European clubs to compete with the Premier league is the European Super League

We heard you the first time;-)

 

[LesBleuMiserable]

With the shite weather we keep having it's only natural people are envious of the 115 beaches... wherever they are. May as well get the blame for those as well.

Are they rocky, pebble or sandy?

I know of our multi club ownership but to add beaches to the portfolio migh City have done good.

 

[Pontypool Blue]

Are they rocky, pebble or sandy?

I know of our multi club ownership but to add beaches to the portfolio migh City have done good.

Dirty

 

[Edghill OG]

If we all stopped recycling in 2,000 years water levels in the Irish Sea will rise enough to sink Liverpool and Manchester will get a beach.

A heavily polluted one mind.

 

[LesBleuMiserable]

lol it wasn’t even Churchill but a chap that sounded like him (Norman Shelley) as poor Mr Winston Churchill was a wee bit inebriated at the time!!

A bit? The sod was a drunk who came up with a few one liners from time to time

 

[KS55]

yaba daba deja vu

I’m so glad the Socialist Worker is around with its great football insight.
Remember what Karl Marx said: “A lone striker is the start of the revolution.”

 

[dickie davies]

We all know that the Premier League spending power is destroying all the European clubs. Unless you get rid of the Premier league and reintroduce the methods the Football Association used English football will not be a sport, it is a competition to see who can make the most money. Thatcherism. The only other alternative for European clubs to compete with the Premier league is the European Super League

If Premier league spending power is destroying European football, why have PL clubs only won the CL seven times in the 22 years since the PL's formation?

 

[Maly]

.
Now if you really care about football AS A SPORT, and not just English football but European football as well, then the solution is get rid of the Premier League. We all know that the Premier League spending power is destroying all the European clubs. Unless you get rid of the Premier league and reintroduce the methods the Football Association used English football will not be a sport, it is a competition to see who can make the most money. Thatcherism. The only other alternative for European clubs to compete with the Premier league is the European Super League

Interesting post bud, but I really can’t agree that the only way for European clubs to compete with prem teams is Super league

You complained about English football being about making as much money as possible & suggest a Super League devised by the greediest clubs in Europe as the only alternative? An alternative which would see the gap between the haves & have nots increase massively

Sorry mate, that’s not an alternative I wish to see

 

[journolud]

I’m so glad the Socialist Worker is around with its great football insight.
Remember what Karl Marx said: “A lone striker is the start of the revolution.”

What did he say about the false 9?

 

[Oyster28catcher]

"The year is 2045, and the Premier League still haven't charged Manchester City. On tonight's Panorama special, in the interest of balance, we unearth rare footage of Bernardo Corradi describing his last City goal..."