Guilty of 114 charges

[Football Special]

1 hour ago, Osvaldorama said:

 

They stole star players from across the premier league and the world. 
They stole youth players. 
They stole trophies, dreams and memories from every other club. 
 

It’s absurd they got away with it for so long. 

I fully acknowledge that I lack the intelligence to understand most of this, but if the crime is money was paid by the owners instead of the sponsors , then why didnt the owners funnel the cash through the sponsor anyway,  they owned Etihad as well as Man City didnt they, all their money regardless , just pay the money from a Etihad account ?

[gio1saints]

I think owners ought to be able to spend whatever the hell they like on their team. If the owners of Man city want it to win medals and trophies - and were willing to pay the best players to get them - then they should be allowed. 
 

Has what they did in not so clandestine fashion ruined “the beautiful game”? Has it fuck. It’s already ruined, open your eyes!
 

But it’s also been entertaining and generated £Billions in revenues for the sport.  Think the Picture of Dorian Gray. Sky TV makes it look beautiful but underneath it’s been rotted, corrupt and despoiled for quite some time.  Dare I mention Portsmouth buying the FA Cup or Abramovich buying well whatever Cups he wanted - Real Madrid basically supported by the Spanish National Government , Italian teams of the eighties all blood doped and even MLT having his stupid little bets on first throw in? The list is almost endless. 
 

A lot of the outrage being expressed right now at Man City owners is virtue signalling hypocritical bollox. Just like with what’s happening / happened with Saints. 

 

 

[Osvaldorama]

29 minutes ago, Football Special said:

I fully acknowledge that I lack the intelligence to understand most of this, but if the crime is money was paid by the owners instead of the sponsors , then why didnt the owners funnel the cash through the sponsor anyway,  they owned Etihad as well as Man City didnt they, all their money regardless , just pay the money from a Etihad account ?

The crime is that the sponsors are all fake. 
 

The “sponsors” are actually just the owners injecting money into the club, through fake sponsors. 
Fake websites, fake staff, fake everything. lol 

[Osvaldorama]

1 minute ago, gio1saints said:

I think owners ought to be able to spend whatever the hell they like on their team. If the owners of Man city want it to win medals and trophies - and were willing to pay the best players to get them - then they should be allowed. 
 

Has what they did in not so clandestine fashion ruined “the beautiful game”? Has it fuck. It’s already ruined, open your eyes!
 

But it’s also been entertaining and generated £Billions in revenues for the sport.  Think the Picture of Dorian Gray. Sky TV makes it look beautiful but underneath it’s been rotted, corrupt and despoiled for quite some time.  Dare I mention Portsmouth buying the FA Cup or Abramovich buying well whatever Cups he wanted - Real Madrid basically supported by the Spanish National Government , Italian teams of the eighties all blood doped and even MLT having his stupid little bets on first throw in? The list is almost endless. 
 

A lot of the outrage being expressed right now at Man City owners is virtue signalling hypocritical bollox. Just like with what’s happening / happened with Saints. 

 

 

Never ceases to amaze me how you can be so wrong on every single topic 

[Cuddles]

2 hours ago, Osvaldorama said:

 

They stole star players from across the premier league and the world. 
They stole youth players. 
They stole trophies, dreams and memories from every other club. 
 

It’s absurd they got away with it for so long. 

That is staggering!

[LiberalCommunist]

I get where Gio is coming from. Man Utd where chucking around £30M on a single player in the 90's. They had a massive head start. So of course obscenely rich Arab owners where going to come in and just do what they do, chuck obscene amounts of money at the problem. However, City knew these rules were in place, so they needed to tidy up the whole affair, not double down on the injustice. 

Side note. I bet if the same forensics was applied to Utd's books they would find similar tricks in a lesser extent. So I take their outrage with a pinch of salt. Villa and Toon should feel pretty hard done by though, they seem to  be the only two clubs who have been totally captured by the financial ceiling. 

In saying that, very welcome sharing the pain from dealing with the governing body, I just hope more are sucked in. Burn it all down as far as I'm concerned. 

[egg]

17 minutes ago, gio1saints said:

I think owners ought to be able to spend whatever the hell they like on their team. If the owners of Man city want it to win medals and trophies - and were willing to pay the best players to get them - then they should be allowed. 
 

Has what they did in not so clandestine fashion ruined “the beautiful game”? Has it fuck. It’s already ruined, open your eyes!
 

But it’s also been entertaining and generated £Billions in revenues for the sport.  Think the Picture of Dorian Gray. Sky TV makes it look beautiful but underneath it’s been rotted, corrupt and despoiled for quite some time.  Dare I mention Portsmouth buying the FA Cup or Abramovich buying well whatever Cups he wanted - Real Madrid basically supported by the Spanish National Government , Italian teams of the eighties all blood doped and even MLT having his stupid little bets on first throw in? The list is almost endless. 
 

A lot of the outrage being expressed right now at Man City owners is virtue signalling hypocritical bollox. Just like with what’s happening / happened with Saints. 

 

 

Not sure where to start with that. 

There's no "virtue signalling hypocritical bollox". Just people rightly outraged that one club has cheated to this extent, and to the detriment of other clubs. 

I take your point that the game has not been holier than thou, but none of the stuff you highlight is anywhere near this.

[Football Special]

1 minute ago, gio1saints said:

I think owners ought to be able to spend whatever the hell they like on their team. If the owners of Man city want it to win medals and trophies - and were willing to pay the best players to get them - then they should be allowed. 
 

Has what they did in not so clandestine fashion ruined “the beautiful game”? Has it fuck. It’s already ruined, open your eyes!
 

But it’s also been entertaining and generated £Billions in revenues for the sport.  Think the Picture of Dorian Gray. Sky TV makes it look beautiful but underneath it’s been rotted, corrupt and despoiled for quite some time.  Dare I mention Portsmouth buying the FA Cup or Abramovich buying well whatever Cups he wanted - Real Madrid basically supported by the Spanish National Government , Italian teams of the eighties all blood doped and even MLT having his stupid little bets on first throw in? The list is almost endless. 
 

A lot of the outrage being expressed right now at Man City owners is virtue signalling hypocritical bollox. Just like with what’s happening / happened with Saints. 

 

 

I agree, surely what Pompey did was loads worse,  spending other people's money they had no intention of repaying (stealing) 

Man City have broken ACCOUNTING rules to enable them to spend more of their OWNERS money , the whole FFP is a charade anyway 

[Football Special]

23 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

The crime is that the sponsors are all fake. 
 

The “sponsors” are actually just the owners injecting money into the club, through fake sponsors. 
Fake websites, fake staff, fake everything. lol 

But if it wasn't for FFP and we just went back to how it used to be they'd have just been allowed to spend their own money , still dont know why they couldn't invest millions in Etihad airways and use their marketing budget to sponsor Man City 

[Turkish]

27 minutes ago, gio1saints said:

I think owners ought to be able to spend whatever the hell they like on their team. If the owners of Man city want it to win medals and trophies - and were willing to pay the best players to get them - then they should be allowed. 
 

Has what they did in not so clandestine fashion ruined “the beautiful game”? Has it fuck. It’s already ruined, open your eyes!
 

But it’s also been entertaining and generated £Billions in revenues for the sport.  Think the Picture of Dorian Gray. Sky TV makes it look beautiful but underneath it’s been rotted, corrupt and despoiled for quite some time.  Dare I mention Portsmouth buying the FA Cup or Abramovich buying well whatever Cups he wanted - Real Madrid basically supported by the Spanish National Government , Italian teams of the eighties all blood doped and even MLT having his stupid little bets on first throw in? The list is almost endless. 
 

A lot of the outrage being expressed right now at Man City owners is virtue signalling hypocritical bollox. Just like with what’s happening / happened with Saints. 

 

 

You've started early. Dealer got some pure stuff in this week?

[Football Special]

I get why clubs shouldn't be able to run up massive debts and end up like Leeds United a few years ago, but if an owner just wants to invest their own cash on their own team why shouldn't they be allowed? 

[egg]

15 minutes ago, Football Special said:

I agree, surely what Pompey did was loads worse,  spending other people's money they had no intention of repaying (stealing) 

Man City have broken ACCOUNTING rules to enable them to spend more of their OWNERS money , the whole FFP is a charade anyway 

That suggests that you have no issue with them cooking the books for years, cranking up prices and wages so other clubs a) can't compete with them for players and b) can't stay within FFP/PSR rules because of said increases. I'm not on board with that. 

FFP/PSR is nonsense, agreed, but that doesn't make any of this right. 

[egg]

13 minutes ago, Football Special said:

I get why clubs shouldn't be able to run up massive debts and end up like Leeds United a few years ago, but if an owner just wants to invest their own cash on their own team why shouldn't they be allowed? 

That's a different issue. They weren't/aren't. 

[LiberalCommunist]

The debate going on in this thread shows that the punishment could be anything. Literally anything. 

Its like Spying. It wasn't even a rule break, until they made it so.  

But now its the worst rule break ever. Its kinda funny. Football has done this to itself. 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by LiberalCommunist

[Osvaldorama]

43 minutes ago, Football Special said:

But if it wasn't for FFP and we just went back to how it used to be they'd have just been allowed to spend their own money , still dont know why they couldn't invest millions in Etihad airways and use their marketing budget to sponsor Man City 

You may dislike FFP, as do I,  but those are the rules. 
 

Every other club signed up to them and followed them, stupid though they are. The fact city had free rein to spend what they like has distorted football. 
 

They have damaged football massively. 
 

This is much worse than what Pompey did because it was £900million pounds, systemic and went on for ages. Not sure what planet people are on. 
 

In my eyes it’s the equivalent of Lance Armstrong’s doping scandal. They performed at a level way higher than they should have been able to. Actually it’s probably worse, because they also weakened the opponents around them by buying their players, which they shouldn’t have been able to buy. 

Edited 47 minutes ago by Osvaldorama

[Football Special]

5 minutes ago, egg said:

That's a different issue. They weren't/aren't. 

Isn't it why FFP was introduced to prevent over spending ? Or was it to deter new owners from spending to compete with established elite who already had high turnover thanks to global fanbase, corporate sponsors and Champions league money? 

[Football Special]

8 minutes ago, Osvaldorama said:

You may dislike FFP, as do I,  but those are the rules. 
 

Every other club signed up to them and followed them, stupid though they are. The fact city had free rein to spend what they like has distorted football. 
 

They have damaged football massively. 
 

This is much worse than what Pompey did because it was £900million pounds, systemic and went on for ages. Not sure what planet people are on. 
 

In my eyes it’s the equivalent of Lance Armstrong’s doping scandal. They performed at a level way higher than they should have been able to. Actually it’s probably worse, because they also weakened the opponents around them by buying their players, which they shouldn’t have been able to buy. 

Much worse than Pompey who stole from charities? 

Isn't Man City the opposite of stealing? They wanted to spend more of their cash that they would never see back

Modern football is fucked anyway unfortunately, hard to get that worked up about this