That's brilliant CIL....balanced thoughts and stuff on there I didn't know about, particularly on timings and things. Very insightful, it helps build a better picture of this shitshow and I for one applaud your post.I think I'm a bit more sanguine about the club's conduct than many on here.
As I understand it, these are the important features of this shitshow.
1. This project has been a long time in the making. I have heard 23 years in some quarters. I'm not sure where that comes from. I have also heard of a 200 page contract document having been drawn up. That kind of thing doesn't happen overnight. This has been planned for a long time, probably measured in years not months.
2. Despite that, City's involvement appears to have come in at the last moment. I have heard that we, and Chelsea, were approached only late last week. I don't know if that's true, but if it is it explains the following three points.
3. What I think is becoming increasingly clear is that we were given the message 'this is happening with or without you. Get on board now, or get left behind.' Despite that, as I recall the news reports from Sunday afternoon, we didn't sign the contract itself, we signed a letter of intent to join the project. So we got on board, with an option to get off again.
4. But having planned this for such a long time, why would the red clubs in particular want us on board, having worked so hard to get us excluded from the Champions League for instance? And why would they throw us this opportunity so late in the day? My guess is (a) they knew our involvement was actually important to the viability of the project (ditto Chelsea), and (b) they left it until the last moment to bring us on board so we had no opportunity to participate in the moulding of the project. It was presented as a fait accompli.
5. City and Chelsea (in whichever order) were the first to break ranks. In City's case, it seems to have been easier if all we signed was a letter of intent. But that has caused the entire cartel to fall apart within a matter of hours. To my mind, that shows how crucial we were to the project. Belatedly, the cartel decided the project could not survive without us. Once we jumped ship, that truth became an even starker reality. It is neither a surprise that we were brought in right at the end, nor that the project started to unravel once we pulled out. As I write, the first team from Spain (Atleti) has pulled out, with news that Inter are about to follow.
6. I don't think it is a coincidence that Pep spoke so openly in opposition to the plans. I suspect our intention not to proceed had been communicated to him by that stage. I suspect he would have been more circumspect if we were fully committed.
So what do I personally make of all this?
(a) This scheme has the fingerprints of the Americans and Perez all over it. I simply do not believe we are the architects of the scheme. Nor do I believe we were willing accomplices with the cunts who have been trying to shaft us for years.
(b) By being asked to come on board, at the 11th hour, the club was actually placed between a rock and a hard place. With very little opportunity to get their heads round the deal, with no opportunity to consult the fans - and I personally believe they would have wanted to do so given the opportunity, as there is so much else they have consulted us about - they were given an important decision and no time to make it.
(c) As I read it, their decision on a sort of 51/49 basis was that getting on board with the option of getting off was potentially less detrimental to the club than staying off with no option of getting on later. Given an unenviable set of alternatives, I don't have as much of an issue as some others do. I would have been happier if they'd had no truck with it in the first place, but I can understand why they did. If this project had gone ahead without us and been a runaway success, we wouldn't have thanked them for not getting on board when we had the opportunity. As it happens, it didn't take long for the club to realise its mistake.
(d) Someone already rightly said that our owner has a huge amount of credit with us in the bank. This has cost him some of that goodwill, but not that much. I have heard calls for FSG and the Glazers to be hounded out of their respective clubs. I personally don't see any appetite at all for Sheikh Mansour to step away from City, nor would I agree with that sentiment if it existed.
So, how do I feel about the club?
Much as I did before. The last 72 hours has been deeply unpleasant, and I am both glad we have come out of it and glad the project is dying an undignified death. Disappointed in our owners, but with (I hope) a measure of acknowledgment that they were in a difficult position, one not of their making, and they made the decision they thought was best while keeping their options open. I am glad that they did, and I am glad that - better late than never - they have done the right thing.
Interesting post and gives very plausable answeres to some of my questions about this, I agree about it being a rock and a hard place decision, hopefully we've got out of it without too much lasting damage to the clubs reputation.I think I'm a bit more sanguine about the club's conduct than many on here.
As I understand it, these are the important features of this shitshow.
1. This project has been a long time in the making. I have heard 23 years in some quarters. I'm not sure where that comes from. I have also heard of a 200 page contract document having been drawn up. That kind of thing doesn't happen overnight. This has been planned for a long time, probably measured in years not months.
2. Despite that, City's involvement appears to have come in at the last moment. I have heard that we, and Chelsea, were approached only late last week. I don't know if that's true, but if it is it explains the following three points.
3. What I think is becoming increasingly clear is that we were given the message 'this is happening with or without you. Get on board now, or get left behind.' Despite that, as I recall the news reports from Sunday afternoon, we didn't sign the contract itself, we signed a letter of intent to join the project. So we got on board, with an option to get off again.
4. But having planned this for such a long time, why would the red clubs in particular want us on board, having worked so hard to get us excluded from the Champions League for instance? And why would they throw us this opportunity so late in the day? My guess is (a) they knew our involvement was actually important to the viability of the project (ditto Chelsea), and (b) they left it until the last moment to bring us on board so we had no opportunity to participate in the moulding of the project. It was presented as a fait accompli.
5. City and Chelsea (in whichever order) were the first to break ranks. In City's case, it seems to have been easier if all we signed was a letter of intent. But that has caused the entire cartel to fall apart within a matter of hours. To my mind, that shows how crucial we were to the project. Belatedly, the cartel decided the project could not survive without us. Once we jumped ship, that truth became an even starker reality. It is neither a surprise that we were brought in right at the end, nor that the project started to unravel once we pulled out. As I write, the first team from Spain (Atleti) has pulled out, with news that Inter are about to follow.
6. I don't think it is a coincidence that Pep spoke so openly in opposition to the plans. I suspect our intention not to proceed had been communicated to him by that stage. I suspect he would have been more circumspect if we were fully committed.
So what do I personally make of all this?
(a) This scheme has the fingerprints of the Americans and Perez all over it. I simply do not believe we are the architects of the scheme. Nor do I believe we were willing accomplices with the cunts who have been trying to shaft us for years.
(b) By being asked to come on board, at the 11th hour, the club was actually placed between a rock and a hard place. With very little opportunity to get their heads round the deal, with no opportunity to consult the fans - and I personally believe they would have wanted to do so given the opportunity, as there is so much else they have consulted us about - they were given an important decision and no time to make it.
(c) As I read it, their decision on a sort of 51/49 basis was that getting on board with the option of getting off was potentially less detrimental to the club than staying off with no option of getting on later. Given an unenviable set of alternatives, I don't have as much of an issue as some others do. I would have been happier if they'd had no truck with it in the first place, but I can understand why they did. If this project had gone ahead without us and been a runaway success, we wouldn't have thanked them for not getting on board when we had the opportunity. As it happens, it didn't take long for the club to realise its mistake.
(d) Someone already rightly said that our owner has a huge amount of credit with us in the bank. This has cost him some of that goodwill, but not that much. I have heard calls for FSG and the Glazers to be hounded out of their respective clubs. I personally don't see any appetite at all for Sheikh Mansour to step away from City, nor would I agree with that sentiment if it existed.
So, how do I feel about the club?
Much as I did before. The last 72 hours has been deeply unpleasant, and I am both glad we have come out of it and glad the project is dying an undignified death. Disappointed in our owners, but with (I hope) a measure of acknowledgment that they were in a difficult position, one not of their making, and they made the decision they thought was best while keeping their options open. I am glad that they did, and I am glad that - better late than never - they have done the right thing.
Sounds plausible.Those expecting a full explanation from the club are in for a major let down, they’ve already briefed they can’t comment for legal reasons.
Personally I’m pretty sure they did the right thing here.
Approached on short notice and told to get in now or never, saw it wasn’t airtight so stepped in, then worked with UEFA to tear the whole thing down from the inside once the greedy cunts gave up every seat of power they held at Uefa.
I trust our owners. Whether you liked it or not, I ‘m sure they acted in the best interests of MCFC here and the outcome has been good for us now our rivals have been decimated by this.
Couldn't have put it better myself, I echo those sentiments.I think I'm a bit more sanguine about the club's conduct than many on here.
As I understand it, these are the important features of this shitshow.
1. This project has been a long time in the making. I have heard 23 years in some quarters. I'm not sure where that comes from. I have also heard of a 200 page contract document having been drawn up. That kind of thing doesn't happen overnight. This has been planned for a long time, probably measured in years not months.
2. Despite that, City's involvement appears to have come in at the last moment. I have heard that we, and Chelsea, were approached only late last week. I don't know if that's true, but if it is it explains the following three points.
3. What I think is becoming increasingly clear is that we were given the message 'this is happening with or without you. Get on board now, or get left behind.' Despite that, as I recall the news reports from Sunday afternoon, we didn't sign the contract itself, we signed a letter of intent to join the project. So we got on board, with an option to get off again.
4. But having planned this for such a long time, why would the red clubs in particular want us on board, having worked so hard to get us excluded from the Champions League for instance? And why would they throw us this opportunity so late in the day? My guess is (a) they knew our involvement was actually important to the viability of the project (ditto Chelsea), and (b) they left it until the last moment to bring us on board so we had no opportunity to participate in the moulding of the project. It was presented as a fait accompli.
5. City and Chelsea (in whichever order) were the first to break ranks. In City's case, it seems to have been easier if all we signed was a letter of intent. But that has caused the entire cartel to fall apart within a matter of hours. To my mind, that shows how crucial we were to the project. Belatedly, the cartel decided the project could not survive without us. Once we jumped ship, that truth became an even starker reality. It is neither a surprise that we were brought in right at the end, nor that the project started to unravel once we pulled out. As I write, the first team from Spain (Atleti) has pulled out, with news that Inter are about to follow.
6. I don't think it is a coincidence that Pep spoke so openly in opposition to the plans. I suspect our intention not to proceed had been communicated to him by that stage. I suspect he would have been more circumspect if we were fully committed.
So what do I personally make of all this?
(a) This scheme has the fingerprints of the Americans and Perez all over it. I simply do not believe we are the architects of the scheme. Nor do I believe we were willing accomplices with the cunts who have been trying to shaft us for years.
(b) By being asked to come on board, at the 11th hour, the club was actually placed between a rock and a hard place. With very little opportunity to get their heads round the deal, with no opportunity to consult the fans - and I personally believe they would have wanted to do so given the opportunity, as there is so much else they have consulted us about - they were given an important decision and no time to make it.
(c) As I read it, their decision on a sort of 51/49 basis was that getting on board with the option of getting off was potentially less detrimental to the club than staying off with no option of getting on later. Given an unenviable set of alternatives, I don't have as much of an issue as some others do. I would have been happier if they'd had no truck with it in the first place, but I can understand why they did. If this project had gone ahead without us and been a runaway success, we wouldn't have thanked them for not getting on board when we had the opportunity. As it happens, it didn't take long for the club to realise its mistake.
(d) Someone already rightly said that our owner has a huge amount of credit with us in the bank. This has cost him some of that goodwill, but not that much. I have heard calls for FSG and the Glazers to be hounded out of their respective clubs. I personally don't see any appetite at all for Sheikh Mansour to step away from City, nor would I agree with that sentiment if it existed.
So, how do I feel about the club?
Much as I did before. The last 72 hours has been deeply unpleasant, and I am both glad we have come out of it and glad the project is dying an undignified death. Disappointed in our owners, but with (I hope) a measure of acknowledgment that they were in a difficult position, one not of their making, and they made the decision they thought was best while keeping their options open. I am glad that they did, and I am glad that - better late than never - they have done the right thing.
We all have our own reasons for feeling strongly about all sorts of stuff so I won't judge you for this post, but I will respect you.Well, the dust has settled a bit but I have to say I'm still disgusted at what happened.
All of the clubs involved had a choice of whether to sign up to the ESL or not and, sadly, they signed up knowing that their decision would effectively kill off their respective domestic leagues and that, for me, is unforgivable.
I've supported City for nearly 50 years but I can't do so any more. That's not a conscious decision I've made, I just don't think I'll ever feel the same way about the club again.
I don't expect many others to feel the same and frankly I don't care whether anyone else does. This whole episode has made me not care and that makes me sad and it makes me angry with our club for making me feel that way.
:-(