Saint86

If you chose to speak publicly on political matters, you chose to open yourself up to public opinions. Which is the key difference between Azaz and Bazunu's actions. Azaz has kept his views private and limited to just his teammates and yet he is the one who has seen discussions over it potentially harming (or even being the end of) his international career.... funny given Bazunu doesn't really have an international future (outside of being in Kelleher's shadow).

Not sure i follow your point here fabrice - Bazunu has chosen to make a very public and political point about it all, and then taken the laughable measure of withdrawing from a game he was in no danger of playing in? And in fairness to him, top marks for virtue signalling there - finally found something he's good at... Meanwhile, Azaz has handled the whole affair within the squad / outside of the public eye, and has had to put up with targeted abuse simply for being part Israeli and for privately having a different opinion on boycotting the game. Of the two of them (or whole squad in fact), the only (part) Israeli guy in the squad (who has kept publicly quiet) shouldn't be getting flack 🤷‍♂️. Personally i think fair play to Azaz for how he's navigated it, as it won't have been easy.

The clubs themselves don't care because its all about the money - but the novelty would soon wear off for the fans when they're facing the prospect of relegation scraps and mid table obscurity every season.

Azaz has done nothing wrong in all of this. Its a shame that some (hopefully a very small minority) Irish fans have decided to make an issue out of him having a different opinion over it all - it would be a real shame if it impacted his future with the national team.

Man City raised the cost of competing to the tune of a billion pounds, and the other clubs lapped it up "for their own gain"? Want to run that one past us again? 😅 It wasn't liverpool, man united, arsenal etc. getting the Etihad billions. But it was their player wages, transfer costs, and agents fees that were going up - and they were the ones missing out on key targets to a financially doped man city.

Yeah, this is embarrassingly naked from him - turning a blind eye to grubby money, fraud, and corruption as long as it gets him votes. Standards out the window as long as it keeps his precious dirty millions in Manchester. Really poor from him, and the worst part is he didn't need to get involved. Out with another turd PM and in with a new one - the revolving door continues. Have to say I agree with Neville's sentiments on it as well: https://x.com/UtdTony1/status/2105379651925275041

5 of the charges directly relate to breaching UEFA's FFP rules. 54 then relate to "Failing to provide a true and fair view of club revenue, sponsorship, and operating costs" - which may include (you would imagine it does include) the UEFA FFP rule breaking. 14 offences relating to, "Failing to fully disclose accurate remuneration details in contracts", which must also surely tie in with breaching UEFA FFP rules - as they're essentially accused of lying about their staff/player wage costs. The remaining offences are exclusive to the EPL - 7PSR breaches, and 35charges relating to not cooperating with the EPL investigation.

Throughout this period, the rules allowed rich owners to invest their money into a club to boost their competitiveness - upto agreed upon limits. Man city have done that, and then smashed through it with flagrant cheating and a litany of dodgy deals and sham (a legal term) sponsorship contracts - In so doing, they have essentially stolen the money invested in, and the efforts of, all other clubs they have competed against. Let alone poaching players, staff, and academy products etc. Leicester were an example of owners investing up to the allowed limits - and actually its evident that Man City directly stole multiple seasons of champions league qualification from them during this period - and now look at the state of Liecester, a club that could very likely cease to exist in the next few years, thanks in part to City's cheating. It is hard to fathom how anyone can justify the scale of damage that City have done to the football pyramid. Why on earth anyone thinks its remotely reasonable for sovereign wealth funds etc., to be able to use their wealth to utterly out-compete with owners like Gao etc (and just eradicate any merit of sporting or business competence with oil money) i don't know... but how anyone can then go one stage further and excuse cheating those rules (and on this scale) is mind boggling. If that is what you are meaning to say, then honestly, i would say to think about it again and potentially reconsider the impacts this has had on a significant number of clubs within the 92.

We weren't powerless to prevent them leaving, we opted to allow them to leave rather than pay them their worth. That's a choice the club actively made. And as has been stated to death, Ballard should have been retained and thats abundantly obvious. He should certainly have been given game time over the multi million pound flops we've singed in the interim, or worst case he should have been given a new contract and allowed further loan development time.

Three immediately prominent answers are Gomes (we got £170K for a potential generational talent on that one), Ballard, and JJM. The last 2 would be playing for us this season 😄.

They've been found guilty by the independent panel. They have 14days now to appeal. If unsuccessful they must then accept the punishment or take it to the high court. At the high court - they would seemingly now be reliant on the same witnesses they used in the premier League defence... The same witnesses the premier league has directly accused of lying. Will those witnesses take that to the high court and risk being found guilty of fraud? I would say they are in serious/existential trouble. At what point does a new club starting a the bottom becomes preferable? Also, if they remain in existence, I would imagine every club that is able will bring a legal case against them. Any form of long term transfer ban will ruin them. And their players will presumably be able to sue them or tear up their contracts, including the academy side. And then SCR rules in the EFL (which is where they are heading) will hamstring them in the face of fines and legal cases.

We won't be playing Man City for a very long time (if indeed ever) after this... £900M and criminal fraud alleged. Thats the end of them, swindon will look like a slap on the wrist.

Really should have had more than 3000 for this... Maximum away allocation (without spacial segregation measures) is about 6000 there. Its relatively easy to get to, and a big game - at least another 1000 should have been taken i feel.

Hopefully not another one that we let go and end up regretting... sadly been a pattern under SR.

What may weight against us here, is that there is likely at least a year still to run on the man city case. Hopefully the Tonda case is resolved this side of Christmas... the longer it goes on i can also see a scenario where they ban him for the playoffs... even seeing it as a poetic justice.