PL charge City for alleged breaches of financial rules

[KS55]

Yeah I have actually, which is one of the reasons I know that the Arbitration act allows 6 years not the 5 of UEFA’s rules, which would mean the Etisalat evidence coming into play - another reason why these two cases are not the same.


Which you know, but have omitted because you’re arguing dishonestly and in bad faith.

I’m not arguing in bad faith, the time limit of the bar has nothing to do with the point I was making which you still haven’t spotted even tho you have read it in the Act. Stop being a complete prick.

 

[Ric]

Let’s leave the personal arguments out please fellas.

 

[Coatigan]

Yeah I have actually, which is one of the reasons I know that the Arbitration act allows 6 years not the 5 of UEFA’s rules, which would mean the Etisalat evidence coming into play - another reason why these two cases are not the same.


Which you know, but have omitted because you’re arguing dishonestly and in bad faith.

You are hung up on the technicality over 'the two cases are/not the same'. But that was not what the original point or the discussion was. The rest is just deeper into the other rabbit hole.

The guy said the club have faced these allegations before. You are arguing the cases are not the same. You are right, they are not the same. But the allegations are. I.E that the club deliberately concealed and cheated the regulations, of one and the other body.

 

[Sale Moor Blue]

The on line vile from other clubs is really upsetting.
Just read something from an Arsenal fan, it was horrible.

 

[Centurions]

The on line vile from other clubs is really upsetting.
Just read something from an Arsenal fan, it was horrible.

Then stop reading it maybe?

 

[KS55]

The on line vile from other clubs is really upsetting.
Just read something from an Arsenal fan, it was horrible.

Take no notice of them, they know nothing and just make it up as they go along.

 

[waspish]

No, you’ve fallen into the trap of thinking “financial controls” means the current system. There’s a million ways you could use them like every other sport - to increase parity.

Your fallen into the trap that clubs can build a team and get Parity without clubs coming knocking for there best players before they reach the top! This happens they'll find it hard to increase there revenue through sponsors.

Look at Villa and Newcastles turnover they need to double it at least to compete, will they get the chance to compete?

 

[bluemanc16]

It's like discussing the decor of the main ballroom on the Titanic, instead of bailing into the lifeboats.

I knew bits about FFP, but there seemed no coherent explanation about our specific situation until @Prestwich_Blue took part in a discussion on YouTube.

Using his take on matters, I did my own detailed research & tried to simplify it for the FFP lay-members amongst our fans.

Essentially, UEFA & the PL are accusing us of fraud, but daren't use the word for fear of the legal can of worms it would open.

When we as fans get entangled with all the innuendo, nods & winks from the governing bodies which are designed to damage our reputation & public image, & ultimately stunt our challenge to their cherished cartel clubs, we lose sight of what all these alleged breaches are really about & designed to do.

They've failed to stop us on the field, so now they're trying to stop us from the boardroom. That's the tall & short of it.

Cutting to the chase, I repeat they're essentially accusing City of fraud. If this is the case, it's long past the time that the PL & UEFA should come out & say so, or shut the fuck up.

Personally, I'm done playing their idiotic games. The more we try to unpick their 115 breach bollocks, the more we add fuel to the fire they started.

This is why when faced with vitriolic opposition fans, I keep it simple & basic. "If you're calling City cheats, this implies fraud. So where's your proof?". This for me is the beginning & end of the matter.

CAS have already ruled UEFA had no evidence, so why the fuck are the PL picking up their baton & coming at us using the same charges which have already failed?

It's all bollocks mate. They need to call our alleged breaches what they keep hinting at, & suffer the consequences. The thing I keep highlighting to all is why aren't/don't they?

Outside of this, I'm not getting dragged any deeper into their bullshit rabbit hole about processes, rules or whatever, which are plainly the only mechanisms they have left to stop Manchester City Football Club.

You ask the question of why the Premier League are picking up CAR baton and coming at us .The answer is the timing of the charges, two days before the Governments announcement of the proposed football regulator. They stick out their chest and proclaimed the Premier League did not need a regulator because it would clean up the PL it's self and where better to start than at the top.But instead of solving the problem it seems that daily more problems are surfacing.The law of unintended consequences springs to mind, i.e.outcomes of a purposeful action that are not intended or foreseen

 

[Bluewonder]

I think you have to start from the destination.

What do we want football to be?

I could write about ways to make it be competitive and have 3/4/5 way title, European and relegation battles, regularly rotating which teams are at the top and winning beyond “the top 4” but I feel like I’d get 20 comments from people who don’t want that and the whole thing would get derailed like the first post.

If you do want that then you have to narrow the gap between richest and poorest somehow, which means changing the revenue distribution, I’d definitely bring back ticket rev sharing because it would get rid of the arms race to exploit fans (5% ticket increase is less attractive when half is going to the other teams). Then you have to address the CL money problem, you’re always going to get a top 4 when 4th gets £60m extra a year to defend that position against 5th.

The ideas are easy, the difficulty is that you’re trying to bring in a system that benefits the poorer smaller players in the sport and hurts the big players by taking away their advantages.

But this is all ideological and the ticket revenue sharing point, whilst well thought out, won't make a material difference.

This brings us to the crux of the matter: it is almost impossible to design financial controls that aren't ultimately damaging to the vast majority of clubs, and very easy to implement measures that are!

 

[StillBluessinceHydeRoad]

A small point. The retain and transfer system meant that a player contract was FOR LIFE and gave the power to grant a transfer or not to the club. The Preston side you mentioned contained Tom Finney who was offered a fortune by an Italian club, I forget which. The Preston chairman said no and that was that. Finney went back to the max wage and his job as a plumber. I do not recall the details of John Charles leaving for Italy, but presumably he was granted release by Leeds.
The system was confirmed as illegal when George Eastham sued Newcastle who would not grant him release. The case resulted in partial freedom of contract.

If I remember correctly - and there's no guarantee of that over the years - but the maximum wage was a kind of FFP in reverse in that it was the "smaller" clubs which wished to maintain it to the letter in the name of competitive balance. The chairman of Preston appears to be one of the hardliners on the other pillar of competitive balance, the retain and transfer system. This took a blow in the courts and the pressure grew from clubs with any chance of competing in the European cup, especially after the "defections". The chairman of Preston "got away with it" in Finney's case but I wonder whether this was as much because Finney was a one club man and of a generation to which loyalty meant a great deal. He very decent man well settled in the town he was born and bred in and where he became a well respected plumbers' merchant. Tom Finney was an all round good egg! But Villa, City, Chelsea et al all needed the eye watering transfer fees the Italians were prepared to pay. A good deal for the club (City paid £53 000 for Law and got nearly £100 000 for him a season later), a great deal for the player but a blow to the English game.