PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

I’m sure the old money of the aristocracy wanted the new money of the industrialists gone post WWI, it didn’t turn out that way did it?
Agreed. The state of post war UK & the Labour government who didn't care too much for the establishment put paid to that.

Remember, the old money & establishment of the aristocracy & ruling classes were vehemently opposed to the post-war Welfare State & the NHS, but they didn't mind sending millions of poor working class folk to die on the killing fields of Europe to defend their state.
 
No, its much more straightforward than the winning of titles. You need to follow the money...

The important thing with regards to the money is qualification for the Champions League. Once you're there. you earn significantly greater income (and profit) by extra TV, commercial deals, matchday income etc. In England, it was all very nice - three spots for Liverpool, Man U and Arsenal. Then along come Chelsea and miraculously a fourth spot opens up. Then along comes City and...oh, wait a minute. the existing teams can't simply guarantee qualifying each year. Even more problematic with Newcastle threatening to join the party....

So actually who wins is irrelevant, just being in the room's the key to this. So, stop the new guys becoming good enough, and as a side issue relieve the pressure on the existing teams actually ahving to spend to keep up...
And when they are good enough and start earning mega bucks in prize money and bonuses from their sponsors, accuse them of falsifying their accounts. And if you are the chief football writer in the Times and you can’t put lies there, put them on Twitter.
 
Those and other signings were designed to piss Bobby Manc off.

They had to wait another 12 months to achieve that after four players including David Silva,allegedly,said they would leave if he stayed.
I don’t think the club decided not to buy two players that could’ve helped us establish a similar hegemony to what we have now. Had Khaldoon wanted to get rid of him then he’d have got rid of him.

FFP was behind that decision
 
It's all about the money and maintaining income streams. All clubs try to influence things in their favour. Over the years some clubs have garnered more influence than others. This influence does not necessarily correlate with current footballing success.

For example reports at the time suggested that Liverpool and Manchester United held private talks with the candidates selected by the EPL's nominating committee to succeed Richard Scudamore. Three candidates were selected, offered and declined the position before Masters accepted.
 
I don’t think the club decided not to buy two players that could’ve helped us establish a similar hegemony to what we have now. Had Khaldoon wanted to get rid of him then he’d have got rid of him.

FFP was behind that decision
We'd just won the league,Bobby was King !!

Do you really think that he targeted players like Sinclaire & Rodwell ??

The DoF bought those players without Bobby's involvement as a demonstration of 'I'm in charge'.

The anti Bobby agenda was in full play !!
 
Forward planning is what all businesses do. If you are building a squad to compete over the coming 10 years,planning for Champions League Qualification, etc are paramount. The Premier League can not allow the Red Cartel and particularly the two north west protagonists to fail.

I believe that those two are particularly worried about the next 5 to 10 years, hense they have got through the present unworkable system.

The rabbit in the hat and what is particularly worrying for them is the new club World Cup format and prize money. This can send City onto a different stratosphere in terms of turnover and profitability, every time they compete.Imagine a season when City win Premiership, new club World Cup and semi-final in Champions League verses a red cartel club not gaining Champions league qualification.

That is why they got to get us now on the charges, or a red cardel club could spiral into irrelevance, which they will not allow.
 
We'd just won the league,Bobby was King !!

Do you really think that he targeted players like Sinclaire & Rodwell ??

The DoF bought those players without Bobby's involvement as a demonstration of 'I'm in charge'.

The anti Bobby agenda was in full play !!
I agree that he didn’t want those clowns but that doesn’t mean that we as a club weren’t hampered in our attempts to buy proper players that summer by FFP
 
OK so lets follow it....The PL didn't try to do anything until 2022. Is waiting doing nothing for 4 years "taking up the cudgel"? No. Clearly fucking not.

By which time City were already the dominant team in the league, had all their related party tranactions scrutinised and approved multiple times and were 100% certain would not be impacted by the new rules. Not much of a "cudgel" is it?

And then you accuse me of dishonesty!?

There's just a massive gaping hole in your logic that you can't reconcile because the Dec 2022 rule changes had nothing to do with City, and yet you're so fucking desperate to pretend they were so it can be fed into your persecution complex.

Look at it again from the point of view of protecting the "cartel" clubs in Europe (if we are talking about UEFA) and England (if we are talking about the PL) from increased competition whether from City, Newcastle or newcomers such as Villa, rather than just stopping City.

Imho, the actions taken, and the timing of them, make more sense in that light, including the RPT/APT rules.

I admire your optimism that this new FFP regime will have any different objectives to the previous incarnations. But I don't share it. Don't forget, all we have to go on is a press article presumably leaked by a club with a vested interest in seeing that particular outcome. No details at all, just a few throw-away lines.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.