Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
halfcenturyup said:
Yes that's good. We shouldn't get too precious if the charges are mentioned in articles about us, it is a fact that the charges have been brought and that they are still outstanding, after all.

What would be nice is a little understanding of the charges, though.

They aren't 115 charges of wrong-doing. They are 115 breaches of regulations caused by a limited number of actual alleged transgressions. People who are working themselves up into a lather on this are just too stupid to understand the actual issues. The press are supposed to be intelligent, though, so they should be able to understand, and explain, the difference. We are talking sports journalists, though, and generally they don't seem to be very bright.
Click to expand...
There are 5 charges.

One is the catch-all about providing accounts that give a true and fair view of our financial position. For that to stick, there would have to have been material misstatements. Highly unlikely.

The second is the key one, relating to Mancini's side contract with Al Jazira and player image rights. If the PL can't land this one, they basically lose the whole case.

The third and fourth relate to meeting UEFA FFP and their own financial rules, based on our submitted accounts. These fall pretty well by default if they can't land the key second charge.

Then there's the non cooperation one, which may be the only one they do land.

So there's really only one substantive charge (or two - the Mancini contract and image rights payments - if we're being pedantic).
 
Last edited:
tolmie's hairdoo said:
Rob Draper with a good and fair read today of City's charges in MoS.

On another note, Sky pulled plug on Delaney being on show this morning.

200m sperm and this twat made it.
Click to expand...

The thing is there is no need to mention the charges at all, especially today of all days. The only reason they are is to lessen our achievements.
 
Benzino said:
It’s mad the things I’ve read this week and especially today.

- People saying the leagues easier to win now
- Peps a chequebook manager, he’s had an open budget to write blank cheques
- City have spent X billion so it’s no surprise we’ve won the league

I can tell you, this is all bullshit, they’re incredibly lazy arguments which hold no weight when faced with facts. When the media say no one can compete with Pep due to finances, they’re actually getting his name mixed up with Alex Ferguson.

Only one team in the 90’s was consistently breaking transfer records, that was Utd, and no one was saying anything. In the early 2000’s they aggressively paid well over the odds for players, whilst everyone else was left behind. Leeds nearly bankrupted themselves between 2000-2003 trying to keep up with them and they failed to achieve anything. In 2001 they spent the equivalent in inflation to what Nottingham Forest have just spent to survive in the PL. In basic terms, PL teams have far more money now. Without FFP the majority of teams could break the British record transfer fee no problem, whereas in the 90’s only one team could do it consistently, that was Utd.

Alex Ferguson is the actual chequebook manager, he was the one with an open budget. He had no FFP to contend with, and he over inflated the market so much, that player values went beyond what most clubs could afford. In the early 00’s, teams at the mid to lower end of the league, were still working on budgets of the early 90’s. Whilst Ferguson signed players like Veron, Nistelrooy, Ferdinand, Rooney, Carrick, for exorbitant fees, way over the market values at the time. Ferdinand value was 2.5x over what the rest of the league was paying for the top market players. It would be like paying the equivalent of £250M today. He was doing it for years, and more to the point, for a long time when no one else could compete financially.

When Chelsea came along in 2002 with new ownership, now Ferguson and Utd had competition in the market. Chelsea went toe to toe with them, they went wild at the start with their signings, with no apparent regard for the actual value of players. As of last year, they’ve managed to inflate transfers on 14 occasions, by paying over market value for players. In comparison, Utd have done it 12 times, Liverpool and Arsenal just three times, Newcastle and Aston Villa only once and City, just twice. We only did it with Grealish and Diaz. Both are brilliant players, but Diaz was slightly over the market value at the time, and Grealish was quite a bit over. However, interestingly Grealish came down to a buyout clause in his contract, which was actually set in a year where the market values were inflated, so Aston Villa’s analytics team must’ve felt he could achieve the market cap. So in their defence, it was actually not such an over inflated figure. But It was only over inflated for us, because we had Covid and the transfer markets crashed quite a bit. If Covid hadn’t of happened, the £100M mark would’ve likely already been broken.

Pep and his teams transfer policy has been absolutely incredible since he arrived. We picked up Ederson, Stones, Laporte, Walker, Bernardo, Rodri, Gundogan, Haaland, Alvarez, for all around half the price or less, of top transfer caps in those season. If we had followed Utd and Chelsea’s past transfer dealings, we would’ve signed someone like John Stones for about £100M. But we didn’t, we got him a great price for the time.

The only reason City have had to spend Billions, is because Utd inflated the market from 93-2002, and then both Chelsea and Utd continued to do that up until this very day. When City signed Robinho for £30M+ in 2008, Utd had already got near that figure 3 times in 6 years with Veron, Ferdinand and Rooney, and Chelsea had got near that figure 5 times. Meaning the tone had been set for a top valued player. But If they hadn’t of inflated the transfers paying over the odds collectively on 8 occasions, in the years before. Robinho would’ve gone for around £15M. Since we were taken over, both Chelsea and Utd have consistently bought more expensive players than City, which result in the price of all top players going up. Whereas City have largely stayed under the radar of the top transfer bands. Which suggests our financial team has a great understanding of what the fair prices are in the climate, and will walk away from deals, that could cause inflation in transfers. Compared with Utd and Chelsea, who don’t seem to care at all, and never get called out for over spending or making stupid deals.

The fact Pep is still able to dominate when there is so many people at the table is astounding. We have signed many players for prices that other clubs could’ve easily afforded. Take our last window for example, Haaland, Akanji, Alvarez and Ortega. All players picked up for minimal fees, yet all of them could probably get in any side in the league. Whereas Chelsea went crazy, and again paid over the odds for Enzo Fernandez and Utd paid over the odds for both Anthony and Casemiro. However, it was the media slagging us off for signing Haaland.

It speaks volumes as to the job Pep and the club as a whole have done in the last few years. Whatever the media say, we should all be incredibly proud and extremely satisfied in the way we’ve gone about becoming a dominate force. We’ve done it in a better way, than both Utd and Chelsea have and that’s a fact, not just a bullshit opinion from some journalist who has never done any actual research.
Click to expand...
Excellent piece.

May I ask where you’ve been hiding for the past decade or so, with your join date of January this year :-)
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
There are 5 charges.

One is the catch-all about providing accounts that give a true and fair view of our financial position. For that to stick, there would have to have been material misstatements. Highly unlikely.

The second is the key one, relating to Mancini's side contract with Al Jazira and player image rights. If the PL can't land this one, they basically lose the whole case.

The third and fourth relate to meeting UEFA FFP and their own financial rules, based on our submitted accounts. These fall pretty well by default if they can't land the key second charge.

Then there's the non cooperation one, which may be the only one they do land.

So there's really only one substantive charge (or two- the Mancini contract and image rights payments - if we're being pedantic).
Click to expand...
How confident are you Col? I’m more bullish about it than I was.
 
chedinho said:
If they had put a bit of thought into the Alvarez situation. They could have actually written a good article.

A World Cup winner sitting waiting for Haaland to get tired. Or a player being taught to play Kev’s role.


Have we bought the next Kevin De Bruyne for £14 Million.
Click to expand...
Remember the absolute fawning in the media when United bought Chicharito before a World Cup?

There were so many articles about how it was possible to find bargains and how clever Ferguson was.

And what about little Ole. Apparently sitting on the bench for United was a privilege.
 
stan bowles said:
I honestly think we'll be featured on the BBC's Panorama in the next couple of weeks. They've already wheeled out Ros Atkins within 2 hours of us winning the league (again). Maybe the Watchdog team will do a feature too ?
Piss boiling is off the scale tonight.
Click to expand...
It won't happen.

Panorama would have to do a proper investigation looking at exactly what we're accused of and putting it in context of overall spending levels, equivalent true value of sponsorships, the CAS findings and the prevalence of third party image right/consultancy payments.

The obvious eventual outcome of this doesn't suit the BBC narrative.

In fact I'm willing to bet they already did the preliminary work before coming to the same conclusion and that's why we haven't seen them cover this already.
 
Eric Hitchmough said:
I dunno mate. We’ve been taking the ‘holistic’ approach for well over a decade and the vitriol is worse than ever, from the media and rival fans alike.

Why we’d ever let Spitty Carragher step foot in our stadium again is beyond me.
Click to expand...
That's my point exactly.

Other fans are now seeing for themselves the disconnect between MCFC'S achievements and the vitriol reporting from these bitter hacks.

It's obvious to everyone apart from the fans of those teams that play in red that this has become an infantile smear campaign.
 
Stiff Little Wingers said:
Very well put. The other thing is that we buy very good or world class players who stay and contribute over prolonged periods. The first generation all stayed 8-10 years and formed one of the greatest spines seen anywhere
Joe Hart, Vinny, Ya Ya, David and Kun.
Now we have the next lot at 4-8 years
Johnny Stones, Kyle, KDB, Ederson, Gundo, Bernardo etc
Click to expand...

Yeah that’s actually a very good point and I think there’s a reason for that which you wouldn’t actually think. So, Journalists in this country are no more than rival fans. If they don’t support City, you’re not going to get honest reporting from them. Problem is, people have unconscious tendency to believe authority figures. So when journalists tell you things enough times, and there’s enough saying it, you can almost start to believe them. Although deep down, logic tells you different and it starts to feel confusing and we lose sight of what’s actually the truth.

Let me tell you some truths, based upon research and analytics. Utd created inflation in the markets since 1992. Ferguson was the biggest chequebook manager the games has ever seen, he had a blank chequebook for many signings and he didn’t have FFP to contend with. If he did, he wouldn’t have been able to sign Veron, RVN, Ferdinand, Rooney, Carrick, Anderson, Nani and Hargreves. Those players with inflation in todays money, would’ve cost Utd £1 Billion, for just 6 players. That was the equivalent of what they spent. Makes Chelsea £600M transfer window seem like peanuts in comparison. That was the level of financial power other clubs were dealing with. That’s not even mentioning all the other players they signed at that period of time too.

FFP has meant our budget was in the same region as all the other top clubs in England or less. Look at Newcastle, why aren’t they signing Messi or Neymar type players… because of FFP. But if this was 92-2002, they might be doing just that. Back then though, it was only Utd doing it. They weren’t doing what we are doing, they were buying the very best players, and often from other clubs in England. I don’t care for the argument they generated the money either. They still had more money to spend than anyone else, they still bought anyone they wanted to, even if they paid well over the odds for them. They had a truly blank chequebook, with no finacial regulations whatsoever, and no one who could compete with them financially.

Today, what FFP has done, has actually helped us in a way, not hindered as much as we like to believe. It’s meant Utd and Chelsea can’t spend beyond the market values as much as they were pre 2011. Because they were absolutely failing FFP rules back then. Yes it was bought in to stop us, but because of this we have had to be extremely creative with growing City as a profitable self sustaining business. Which means City have managed to claw their way to the profit table far quicker than we might have. Which only serves us well going forward.

FFP also meant we had to be careful not to increase inflation on transfers by always buying the most expensive individual players in the season. It does mean though, City have had to walk away from certain deals, ones we might otherwise gone for. But that strategy of not paying over the threshold for players, or trying to inflate the market prices has worked really well so far.

In most cases, we sign players for the same price other clubs can also afford! Some clubs might not have been able to afford to spend the same amount across the window due to budget and FFP, but they could’ve easily snatched away individual signings from us. That’s the BIG point. IF, players chose to come to City, they do so, ahead of other clubs. Which supports the notion we hear, you have to be 100% committed to us. That in itself helps us to get these players. Take Grealish, an Aston Villa fan, who rejected the same contract from Villa to come to City. Fernandinho, who paid £6M of his own contract to get a move. Kompany and Co always talking about ‘the project’ and how they wanted to be a part of it. Like Nasri, saying he rejected loads of clubs, and then chose City over Utd, eventually due to the project, as they both offered the same money. The Bernardo and Mendy story, where they both said with such glee they wanted to move to City in the Monaco changing room. Then on the flip side, you’ve got Alexis Sanchez, Koulibaly, Jorginho or Cucarella. Who looked like they’d sign, but then seemed to be less committed to us and more to the money, and off they went to Utd and Chelsea, and all of them, disappointed.

So yeah, cheers UEFA, and fuck you. Mostly though, thanks to the hierarchy of City for outsmarting them. Thanks to Peps and his genius philosophy of buying players and coaching them into better players, his unbelievable style of play, and dominating when more teams can compete with us financially. Forget what the lying media say, we’re the best team the league has ever seen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top