Martin Lipton: City Not Big Enough For The CL

Yeah, a couple of others have hinted at but not really fully explained, the OP/thread title has it wrong - it's not an opinion piece and it's nothing to do with the CL. It's an extrapolation from a German article from a Frankfurt news source.

The story isn't that we're not big enough for the CL, it's that the organisers of the Super League have now convinced UEFA to take ownership of the competition as a new first level of European competition with the CL and EL becoming the second and third tier. 14 teams to be given automatic entry and 10 to have to qualify. Lipton's "source" takes up the story from that point onwards and says that England would be offered four automatic qualifying berths, and therefore City wouldn't make the cut but could still qualify through the remaining qualifying slot which would go to league position.

Take what you will from that.

Oh, and in other news, the German source suggests that the Bundesliga could be considering ending their current rules preventing private investors/companies owning a majority of shares, so that from that what you will, also.
 
Falastur said:
Yeah, a couple of others have hinted at but not really fully explained, the OP/thread title has it wrong - it's not an opinion piece and it's nothing to do with the CL. It's an extrapolation from a German article from a Frankfurt news source.

The story isn't that we're not big enough for the CL, it's that the organisers of the Super League have now convinced UEFA to take ownership of the competition as a new first level of European competition with the CL and EL becoming the second and third tier. 14 teams to be given automatic entry and 10 to have to qualify. Lipton's "source" takes up the story from that point onwards and says that England would be offered four automatic qualifying berths, and therefore City wouldn't make the cut but could still qualify through the remaining qualifying slot which would go to league position.

Take what you will from that.

Oh, and in other news, the German source suggests that the Bundesliga could be considering ending their current rules preventing private investors/companies owning a majority of shares, so that from that what you will, also.
Click to expand...
14 teams, now that number seems familiar for some reason, can't think what
 
Phelan's Pace said:
Without being argumentative though, we've attracted business deal after business deal of late and of course the worlds most sought after manager. They don't seem to have listened to the sun etc. We are also attracting up to 47k fans, some of whom will have bought into the recent success. Many of those new fans are foreign tourists too. Obviously the counter to that could be the sun may have deterred a shit load more of both, but you get my point I'm sure...
I get yours.
Click to expand...

Of course but public opinion and perception affect us on a daily basis and that perception is influenced by propaganda. Just what the 'big clubs' who are not doing so well want.
 
Falastur said:
Yeah, a couple of others have hinted at but not really fully explained, the OP/thread title has it wrong - it's not an opinion piece and it's nothing to do with the CL. It's an extrapolation from a German article from a Frankfurt news source.

The story isn't that we're not big enough for the CL, it's that the organisers of the Super League have now convinced UEFA to take ownership of the competition as a new first level of European competition with the CL and EL becoming the second and third tier. 14 teams to be given automatic entry and 10 to have to qualify. Lipton's "source" takes up the story from that point onwards and says that England would be offered four automatic qualifying berths, and therefore City wouldn't make the cut but could still qualify through the remaining qualifying slot which would go to league position.

Take what you will from that.

Oh, and in other news, the German source suggests that the Bundesliga could be considering ending their current rules preventing private investors/companies owning a majority of shares, so that from that what you will, also.
Click to expand...
Put more eloquently than i could. Well explained.
 
Falastur said:
Yeah, a couple of others have hinted at but not really fully explained, the OP/thread title has it wrong - it's not an opinion piece and it's nothing to do with the CL. It's an extrapolation from a German article from a Frankfurt news source.

The story isn't that we're not big enough for the CL, it's that the organisers of the Super League have now convinced UEFA to take ownership of the competition as a new first level of European competition with the CL and EL becoming the second and third tier. 14 teams to be given automatic entry and 10 to have to qualify. Lipton's "source" takes up the story from that point onwards and says that England would be offered four automatic qualifying berths, and therefore City wouldn't make the cut but could still qualify through the remaining qualifying slot which would go to league position.

Take what you will from that.

Oh, and in other news, the German source suggests that the Bundesliga could be considering ending their current rules preventing private investors/companies owning a majority of shares, so that from that what you will, also.
Click to expand...

Exactly mate. City not being big enough was not an attack by Martin Lipton but an explanation of how things will work if the super league goes ahead with the mooted guaranteed places for clubs for those clubs with larger global audiences.

The onle line even remotely consisered controversial relates to Tottenham and Leicester.

The OP has been a bit misleading and sadly some City fans, without reading it, have already made a judgement that its all part of this widespread conspiracy against us.

Pidge, I mean Frank
 
Falastur said:
Yeah, a couple of others have hinted at but not really fully explained, the OP/thread title has it wrong - it's not an opinion piece and it's nothing to do with the CL. It's an extrapolation from a German article from a Frankfurt news source.

The story isn't that we're not big enough for the CL, it's that the organisers of the Super League have now convinced UEFA to take ownership of the competition as a new first level of European competition with the CL and EL becoming the second and third tier. 14 teams to be given automatic entry and 10 to have to qualify. Lipton's "source" takes up the story from that point onwards and says that England would be offered four automatic qualifying berths, and therefore City wouldn't make the cut but could still qualify through the remaining qualifying slot which would go to league position.

Take what you will from that.

Oh, and in other news, the German source suggests that the Bundesliga could be considering ending their current rules preventing private investors/companies owning a majority of shares, so that from that what you will, also.
Click to expand...

Hmm.

Basing a league on tv ratings then leaving out City, seems a bit of a Lipton argument rather than a 'superleague' argument. That means presumably that Arse & Chelsea plus Liverpool or Spurs are so popular these days that they would write off the viewing figures for two Manchester derbies in order to accomodate them ?

Basing a league on tv ratings seems a quite ridiculous idea. What happens when the ratings of some go up or down? Promotion & relegation based on tv ratings ? And why would you not have City but have teams from other European countries, with lower ratings ?

Just sounds to me like someone making shit up.
 
franksinatra said:
Exactly mate. City not being big enough was not an attack by Martin Lipton but an explanation of how things will work if the super league goes ahead with the mooted guaranteed places for clubs for those clubs with larger global audiences.

The onle line even remotely consisered controversial relates to Tottenham and Leicester.

The OP has been a bit misleading and sadly some City fans, without reading it, have already made a judgement that its all part of this widespread conspiracy against us.

Pidge, I mean Frank
Click to expand...
Fuck you Frank! I'm Pidge!!!
 
Phelan's Pace said:
Fuck you Frank! I'm Pidge!!!
Click to expand...

Sadly mate I have had this comment thrown at me for 6 months. Im not letting you take this title from me without a fight.


The forum must be going easy on you. Ive not heard you called a rag or a tiresome troll yet :-).
 
Neville Kneville said:
Hmm.

Basing a league on tv ratings then leaving out City, seems a bit of a Lipton argument rather than a 'superleague' argument. That means presumably that Arse & Chelsea plus Liverpool or Spurs are so popular these days that they would write off the viewing figures for two Manchester derbies in order to accomodate them ?

Basing a league on tv ratings seems a quite ridiculous idea. What happens when the ratings of some go up or down? Promotion & relegation based on tv ratings ? And why would you not have City but have teams from other European countries, with lower ratings ?

Just sounds to me like someone making shit up.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day it doesn't come down to the TV ratings for games, though. It comes down to how many subscribers TV channels would get to watch their teams in certain competitions, because that is the money which is going to get pumped into this competition, potentially at something silly like 2:1 (money earned:money spent on TV rights). I doubt many people would buy BT Sport just to see the Manchester derby twice a year. Those TV companies will carry out marketing surveys to see which four clubs bring in the most business, and to be quite honest we will probably not be in the top four.

Besides, the German article (though the translation made it uncertain) suggests that the Super League idea was drifting back to a alongside-domestic-leagues style so the TV companies still get Manchester derbies in the PL.
 
franksinatra said:
Sadly mate I have had this comment thrown at me for 6 months. Im not letting you take this title from me without a fight.


The forum must be going easy on you. Ive not heard you called a rag or a tiresome troll yet :-).
Click to expand...
Someone said I was a rag because I was being too pro City.

I'm still trying to figure that out.
 
franksinatra said:
Sadly mate I have had this comment thrown at me for 6 months. Im not letting you take this title from me without a fight.


The forum must be going easy on you. Ive not heard you called a rag or a tiresome troll yet :-).
Click to expand...
Phelan's Pace said:
Absolutely. At least I know now I'm accused of being a person as opposed to an act. I thought 'being pidge' was an act, like 'to pidge'. I've learned what a clarkie is so I thought that was another one to get to grips with.
Click to expand...
You could be onto something there.
 
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