so this agenda thing.

[George Hannah]

I don't believe FFP was conceived to hamper City per se, but rather the concept of the 'project' and what it stood for in terms of a threat to the status quo if it was to be applied more widely.

Perhaps it's a moot, marginal difference, but it does distinguish in one particular respect: namely the success or otherwise of its intentions.

If the aim was to stop Manchester City then it has to be said it has conspicuously failed - and will continue to. If the aim was to protect the established elite and create sufficient barriers to entry to dissuade others from trying to emulate City, then it has to be seen as a success.

If it is the latter, I expect our place at the top table is a price most of the ancien regime will be more than willing to accept.

Not sure about that, it hasn't stopped PSG and Monaco who followed in our footsteps and I fancy a few more like Valencia may be on their way soon.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I don't believe FFP was conceived to hamper City per se, but rather the concept of the 'project' and what it stood for in terms of a threat to the status quo if it was to be applied more widely.

Perhaps it's a moot, marginal difference, but it does distinguish in one particular respect: namely the success or otherwise of its intentions.

If the aim was to stop Manchester City then it has to be said it has conspicuously failed - and will continue to. If the aim was to protect the established elite and create sufficient barriers to entry to dissuade others from trying to emulate City, then it has to be seen as a success.

If it is the latter, I expect our place at the top table is a price most of the ancien regime will be more than willing to accept.

Not sure about that, it hasn't stopped PSG and Monaco who followed in our footsteps and I fancy a few more like Valencia may be on their way soon.

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.

We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.

Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious ****....

 

[George Hannah]

I don't believe FFP was conceived to hamper City per se, but rather the concept of the 'project' and what it stood for in terms of a threat to the status quo if it was to be applied more widely.

Perhaps it's a moot, marginal difference, but it does distinguish in one particular respect: namely the success or otherwise of its intentions.

If the aim was to stop Manchester City then it has to be said it has conspicuously failed - and will continue to. If the aim was to protect the established elite and create sufficient barriers to entry to dissuade others from trying to emulate City, then it has to be seen as a success.

If it is the latter, I expect our place at the top table is a price most of the ancien regime will be more than willing to accept.

Not sure about that, it hasn't stopped PSG and Monaco who followed in our footsteps and I fancy a few more like Valencia may be on their way soon.

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.
We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.
Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious c**t....

I stand forlorn in the corner, corrected and diminished, my Latin primer stained with tears

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Not sure about that, it hasn't stopped PSG and Monaco who followed in our footsteps and I fancy a few more like Valencia may be on their way soon.

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.
We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.
Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious c**t....

I stand forlorn in the corner, corrected and diminished, my Latin primer stained with tears

Est quaedam flere voluptas.

 

[George Hannah]

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.
We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.
Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious c**t....

I stand forlorn in the corner, corrected and diminished, my Latin primer stained with tears

Est quaedam flere voluptas.

ridiculam cunnus

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I stand forlorn in the corner, corrected and diminished, my Latin primer stained with tears

Est quaedam flere voluptas.

ridiculam cunnus

That's the first time I've think I've seen you swear, GH.

 

[the talisman]

I haven't read much of this thread (I don't need to, I know there's a fucking agenda:-)) and the only latin I know is Superbia in Proelio (or is it Proelia….)
But I had a thought.

Mario off to the dippers should answer the question once and for all. I wait with bated breath to see if he gets treated the same as he did when he played for us.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I haven't read much of this thread (I don't need to, I know there's a fucking agenda:-)) and the only latin I know is Superbia in Proelio (or is it Proelia….)
But I had a thought.

Mario off to the dippers should answer the question once and for all. I wait with bated breath to see if he gets treated the same as he did when he played for us.

This might provide a useful reference point.

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2014/08/seven-liverpool-legends-despise-mario-balotelli.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2014/08/se ... telli.html</a>

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

Are we just going to forget that he went away to be the best striker in Italy and might come back a different person who won't always be in the press?

 

[franksinatra]

I haven't read much of this thread (I don't need to, I know there's a fucking agenda:-)) and the only latin I know is Superbia in Proelio (or is it Proelia….)
But I had a thought.

Mario off to the dippers should answer the question once and for all. I wait with bated breath to see if he gets treated the same as he did when he played for us.

I am guessing it will depends on how he behaves. Anyway regardless on the wacky world of agendas I am people will find something. No doubt the first stray elbow which does not receive a booking will result into comparisons with stray elbows during his time at City. As if their are no other inconsistencies in football except to promote a bias against City.

 

[bluegirl74]

Are we just going to forget that he went away to be the best striker in Italy and might come back a different person who won't always be in the press?

if the rumours of an insistence on behaviour clauses in the contract are to be believed it would seem that mario's new employers don't think he's changed that much...

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

Are we just going to forget that he went away to be the best striker in Italy and might come back a different person who won't always be in the press?

if the rumours of an insistence on behaviour clauses in the contract are to be believed it would seem that mario's new employers don't think he's changed that much...

Key word is rumours.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

If you have to ask the question about someone's behaviour . . . . . . . . . .!

 

[Deleted member 58678]

Are we just going to forget that he went away to be the best striker in Italy and might come back a different person who won't always be in the press?

Cavani was more impressive the other season and Tevez was more impressive last season.

 

[cibaman]

I don't believe FFP was conceived to hamper City per se, but rather the concept of the 'project' and what it stood for in terms of a threat to the status quo if it was to be applied more widely.

Perhaps it's a moot, marginal difference, but it does distinguish in one particular respect: namely the success or otherwise of its intentions.

If the aim was to stop Manchester City then it has to be said it has conspicuously failed - and will continue to. If the aim was to protect the established elite and create sufficient barriers to entry to dissuade others from trying to emulate City, then it has to be seen as a success.

If it is the latter, I expect our place at the top table is a price most of the ancien regime will be more than willing to accept.

I think they will believe it's worked in that it's kept us in the pack. It's prevented us from dominating European football by outspending everyone. There's no longer a threat that we will buy messi, ronaldo, ibramovich and numerous other superstars. I don't think they were ever that bothered about us breaking into the club, more that we didn't leave the club trailing behind us.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

I don't believe FFP was conceived to hamper City per se, but rather the concept of the 'project' and what it stood for in terms of a threat to the status quo if it was to be applied more widely.

Perhaps it's a moot, marginal difference, but it does distinguish in one particular respect: namely the success or otherwise of its intentions.

If the aim was to stop Manchester City then it has to be said it has conspicuously failed - and will continue to. If the aim was to protect the established elite and create sufficient barriers to entry to dissuade others from trying to emulate City, then it has to be seen as a success.

If it is the latter, I expect our place at the top table is a price most of the ancien regime will be more than willing to accept.

I think they will believe it's worked in that it's kept us in the pack. It's prevented us from dominating European football by outspending everyone. There's no longer a threat that we will buy messi, ronaldo, ibramovich and numerous other superstars. I don't think they were ever that bothered about us breaking into the club, more that we didn't leave the club trailing behind us.

Maybe that's not altogether a bad thing.

 

[Bill]

No one is saying there is an agenda against the players, lets not forget Joe Hart is an ‘England’ player and there are plenty of people out there who support England and will put club allegiances to one side. There is no doubt that Hart is very marketable, clean living, great image, articulate etc why wouldn’t marketing agencies see value in that – they’re not promoting mcfc he happens to be an mcfc player. Sergio Aguero similarly is a world star. Yet again its straws being grasped, clinged to, by the non agendarists while you ignore the elephant in the room



You’re simply reinforcing my point. It is the timing of FFP that clearly and unashamedly points towards the regulations being introduced against MCFC. Take a closer look at your examples above and it proves the point

Zenit – Gazprom bought the club in 2005 and invested over 100 million – no FFP
Anzi – Bought by billionair Sulemeyn Kerimov in 2011 – after FFP – now given up the ghost
Shakhtar Donetzk – Billionaire Rinat Akhmetov bought the club in 1996 – no FFP
Chelsea – Ambramovich bought the club in 2003 – no FFP
Wolfsburg – clutching at straws no significant investment record transfer pre FFP was 12.32m
Bayer Leverkusen – Not even sure why you threw them into the pot, record transfer pre FFP was 7.48m back in 02/03
Paris – Qatar took them over in 2011 - post FFP
Monaco – Rybolovlev took ajority stake in 2011 – again post FFP
Malaga – Sheikh Abdullah Al Thani – took over in 2010 again post FFP

So as I stated every time there prior to MCFC being bought there were rich oligarchs buying clubs and investing 100’s of millions yet nothing was done. Yet it only took UEFA 1 year after MCFC being bought by Sheikh Mansour for FFP to come into existence, presumerably that was 5 minutes spent sh*tting themselves and the rest of the year coming up with the regulations, basically the response was effectively instantaneous. How anyone cannot deduce from this that it was a direct response to our potential wealth and a direct agenda against MCFC is simply sticking their fingers in their ears, closing their eyes and shouting loudly because they don’t want to hear what they are being told.

If you want evidence, its pretty compelling, far more so than any evidence yet found for the awarding of the world cup to Qatar.



That’s precisely the point, they’re absolutely NOT doing any of the above and there is countless numbers of examples on this thread



The bookies are there to make money they produce odds that ensure this – nothing to do with MCFC

[/b]

You really are missing the point. The fact we have fantastic owners who have managed the club so professionally and brought us success beyond our wildest dreams doesn’t change the fact that there is a governing body that is doing everything in its power to protect the status quo, it may well be failing but the punishments meted out to us this summer, clipping our ability to invest, is the start of the fightback. The regulations may now inadvertently protect us from ever pluming the depths again but the Premier League, UEFA will not mind an MCFC that is finishing 5th or 6th every season. Does anyone think that without FFP we wouldn’t have been signing Costa, Fabregas or Sanchez ? I think we would have been going toe to toe for all 3 and probably signing all three or at least the one we may have wanted.

But I and a fair few others keep on posting when there are positive things in the media about us but you lot choose to ignore the lot of them. There are examples out there everyday with someone in the media being positive about City. I've been off work recently and posted something in this thread probably every other day and I don't even particularity search for them. I watch Sky or listen to talkSPORT or look at certain articles online and hear/read both positives and negatives about us. Yet people post in here only focusing on the negative someone says and talking as if the positive was never said. It's people "simply sticking their fingers in their ears, closing their eyes and shouting loudly because they don’t want to hear what they are being told."

And why City? What is it about Manchester City Football Club that UEFA doesn't like? That's the thing that doesn't make any sense with your time line. Give me a reason that it wasn't just a coincidence in the timing of FFPR. Or evidence that there is something about our club that needs sanctioning? Or was it just that they felt football in general and what was happening with us was just a coincidence of timing? Because I think I am the only person ever to offer an actual reason for this ever on this topic and after the one reason I offered I had numerous complaints about my point and received a warning from Ric, so it can't be that as I was told I was so extremely wrong. But there is absolutely no other reason. Why particularly us and not other clubs? Not one person has ever offered an explanation other than me for why it is all so focused on City.

I'm not adverse to hearing I've been wrong about all this, but I have not read one single thing from anyone ever on this topic to convince me that there is a conspiracy to bring down, halt or even just slow down Manchester City Football Club in particular as a single club and nobody else.

For me it's quite straigthforward and I don't believe the timing of FFP was one of coincidence. If it was genuinely about fairness then they would have done something back in 2002 when the rags spent what was then an outrageous 30 million on Rooney.

If you look at all the other teams that have had rich owners trying to break into the elite many of them have come from football backwaters as per the Russian examples. They would never seriously challenge the elite and plus they were not in domestic leagues that present a direct challenge. The likes of Boro and Blackburn equally were from small remote towns who, despite their wealth at the time, would never present a serious threat.

Then there is MCFC....

The difference here and why I believe FFP was introduced as a direct response to our new found wealth is that the time we entered the fray, football was starting to go truly global and there were already 4 very well established, well supported and powerful global clubs in Scouse, Rags, Chelsea and Arsenal.

When Chelsea got their wealth they were already arguably part of the comfy cartel, permanently challenging for the top 4, suddenly, with our new found wealth where there was 4 you could now argue there would be 5

MCFC are from one of the major footballing cities in the north, we are direct challengers to the rags (the biggest club in the UK) and 5 into 4 champs league places won't go, and therein lies the threat.

Suddenly it was becoming clear that we would be threatening the wealth and dominance of the top 4 clubs, one of them would be missing out on the riches of the champs league - cue mass panic and the rushing in of new regulations less than a years after our new owners had come in.

Make no mistake these regulations are the to try and stop our success and dislodging one of the big boys from their perch each and every year. Now FFP may well fail in its goal, but make no mistake, it's introduction (IMO) was a direct response to the threat we posed to the status quo.

Make no mistake if the rags don't get into the top four again this season it will be very interesting to see what move the governing bodies next make if as seems likely were not going to be held back by these regulations. Don't be surprised if a top 4 champions league space now becomes a top 5, or, as we are already seeing the UEFA cup has suddenly become a route to qualify for the champs league so they are already looking at ways round it. Unfortunately for the rags they even managed to f*ck that one up last season by finishing a woeful 7th.

word for word bang on the money.

 

[Chris in London]

I don't believe FFP was conceived to hamper City per se, but rather the concept of the 'project' and what it stood for in terms of a threat to the status quo if it was to be applied more widely.

Perhaps it's a moot, marginal difference, but it does distinguish in one particular respect: namely the success or otherwise of its intentions.

If the aim was to stop Manchester City then it has to be said it has conspicuously failed - and will continue to. If the aim was to protect the established elite and create sufficient barriers to entry to dissuade others from trying to emulate City, then it has to be seen as a success.

If it is the latter, I expect our place at the top table is a price most of the ancien regime will be more than willing to accept.

Not sure about that, it hasn't stopped PSG and Monaco who followed in our footsteps and I fancy a few more like Valencia may be on their way soon.

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.

We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.

Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious c**t....

More of a cunning linguist, I'd say...

Just watch for the odd slip of the tongue, that can really leave you in the shit

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Not sure about that, it hasn't stopped PSG and Monaco who followed in our footsteps and I fancy a few more like Valencia may be on their way soon.

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.

We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.

Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious c**t....

More of a cunning linguist, I'd say...

Just watch for the odd slip of the tongue, that can really leave you in the shit

Nice to have you back, boss.

 

[Chris in London]

PSG were part of the G-14 so they could hardly be described arriviste impostors, unlike our good selves. Monaco have yet to make a worthwhile impression at the top of the European game under the current ownership and are arguably currently downsizing to a discernible extent.

We'll wait and see re: Valencia et al.

Even by my standards I seem to be using a lot of Latin and French today. I do hope I haven't conveyed the impression of being a pretentious c**t....

More of a cunning linguist, I'd say...

Just watch for the odd slip of the tongue, that can really leave you in the shit

Nice to have you back, boss.

I'm not back yet, just in transit

Had the joy of the Newcastle game on a South American channel. Their commentary sounds a lot like machine gun fire with a fifteen second (I kid you not). "GOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!" when Silva scored.

Aguero's was longer.

Star bar Monday?