Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 289 comments are related to the topic:
City banned from champions league,,,
City banned from champions league,,,
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 289
|
By:
Reduced to a suspended and a fine on appeal imo.
|
|
By:
Oliver Holt
@OllieHolt22 But let's not pretend that Uefa's brand of FFP is some well-intentioned device to save football from the oligarchy of the privileged. It's the opposite of that. It's designed to enshrine old money and keep out challengers. |
|
By:
all the clubs signed up to FFP rules whether they are flawed or not
to start crying about being caught by them now is frankly pathetic City fans boo the CL anthem anyway so Im sure everybody will be happy they are out of the competition They are lucky not also to have a transfer ban and got away with it by the skin of their teeth Perhaps they should look at themselves rather than blaming others and learn some lessons |
|
By:
If City have broken the rules then they deserve to be banned. They also have the right to appeal UEFA's decision.
|
|
By:
If City turn up at the appeal with so called new evidence then the UEFA charge of non co operation will be proven
Its not just the breach of FFP that is being judged here but the actions of the club owners to the charge Obviously the owners are used to making their own rules being part of the ruling elite of an evil totalitarian state The fact that we are supposed to have fit and proper tests for club owners is a joke Everton should also be investigated - getting £100m for the option on naming rights for a stadium that hasnt even got planning permission yet is another clear case of financial doping |
|
By:
Do people seriously think FPP was introduced 'to stop clubs going bust' ?
 |
|
By:
FFP didn't do much good for Bury
|
|
By:
ian herberts article in the daily mail yesterday man city are "a grubby club with under the table dealings "
 |
|
By:
Spot on Rothko.
And Ian Herbert. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Perspective here from a Spurs fan:
This just serves as a reminder that, regardless of what they have won over the past decade, Manchester City are still just a small local club cheating their way to the top table with steroids. Even when some of the best football the country has ever been seen was being played at their stadium, there were still thousands of empty seats every week. Through the most in-your-face, dodgy, corrupt practices, a family with a long list of human rights abuses directly attributed to their names has turned them into their plaything, without a care in the world for who else they have screwed over along the way. If we look at Tottenham alone, our past decade could have been very different had City (and Chelsea before them) not won the lottery. Ten years ago, Levy's first vision was finally coming to fruition, we had an emerging side of talented players that played good football, assembled through intelligent scouting and careful budget planning. Modric, Bale, Lennon, Defoe, King, Dawson, Huddlestone, Rose and even a teenage Harry Kane - the foundations were there to build a top side for the next few years. We had been camped outside the gates of the Champions League for years, biding our time, waiting for one of the old "big four" to blink and drop out. Finally - Liverpool did, they made some terrible decisions on and off the pitch from 2008-2010 and their team fell to pieces. It should have been our moment to capitalise. It should have been our turn. But instead, this small local club who had already tried selling their soul and dignity to a disgraced Thai politician, suddenly muscled their way in ahead of us. Who knows how things could have turned out differently for us if Man City's squad was still made up of players of the calibre of Emile Mpenza and Rolando Bianchi. Logically, we'd have been looking at four more Champions League qualifications over the past decade just by virtue of having finished one place behind those who did qualify with City occupying one of those places. Thing what that extra exposure and revenue (especially pre-stadium construction) could have meant for us at that point. Would Modric and Bale's heads have been turned as quickly as they were if we'd been Champions League regulars? What if we'd actually been able to sign players like Craig Bellamy, Gareth Barry and Sergio Aguero, all of which we bid for, only to be completely blown out of the water by ridiculous offers of money from Man City? What if this hadn't had the knock on effect to distort the market, where agents representing our transfer targets saw this kind of activity from City and decided that therefore, their players were "worth" way more in wages than they actually were? What if, at the time we finally had a side that looked good enough to win the league, Kyle Walker hadn't received a "treble your money" offer from them? We tried to do things by the book. Fairly, ethically, morally - the right way that every club should be proud of. And City came along with their financial doping and spoilt it. They might not have directly knocked us out of any cups, or beaten us in the two title races we were involved in. But make no mistake, this behaviour from Man City has had a huge hindrance on our fortunes over the past decade. And for that reason, I am over the moon with this ruling. F*ck Manchester City, f*ck their spoilt and tiny fan base and f*ck their evil owners - you have had it coming and quite frankly you have gotten off lightly. |
|
By:
themover • February 16, 2020 11:21 AM GMT
"Owners are allowed to invest under the rules, just not to the ridiculous levels the City owners have." Why not? It's the owners club and money? Because they are the rules FFS? How do you not realise that even at this stage? Why do you think City have been sanctioned? themover • February 16, 2020 11:25 AM GMT "The rules may have been introduced to prevent clubs going bust" Do you think City are in danger of going bust? No, but it is irrelevant and I've no idea why you think that is relevant or would even ask me that? What is your point? If I were a City fan, I'd be massively píssed off with the people running the club and their attitude. I'd be happy with the FFP rules because they are fairly easy to circumvent even if you want to financially dope the club, I certainly wouldn't be complaining about them. Look at some of the wasteful signings they have made over the years and how they haven't bothered trying to sell players or get wages off the books for players who added very little to the squad.If they'd done that they'd be alright but their attitude has been 'why bother, fúck the rules' The attitude is that of a regime that has never had to earn or work for money and has never had to abide by rules because they come from a background of absolute wealth and power. The reason they are in this mess is because of the contempt they have shown from day 1 more than anything else imo. They haven't even sought to explain how the emails were supposedly taken out of context, as they claim, or to explain how their finances are legit. What sort of approach is that? Even now the noises coming out of the club stink of arrogance and being above the rules and they are already talking about having compiled a dossier on other big clubs' finances and sponsorship. That's like going into a murder trial with the defence of 'my next door neighbour killed someone too and so did they guy two doors down'. It's a ridiculous approach. I still don't think they will be banned from the CL but it would be great for their owners to be put in their place and for some manners to be put on them. |
|
By:
CAS tend to reduce pretty much everything on appeal, UEFA have to know this is going to be fought to the highest level so be interesting what they have as they have to be anticipating it and think they have some kind of case to be upheld.
|
|
By:
that article from the Tottenham fan is laughable, he insinuated Tottenham could have got Aguero if Man City hadn't of got there first!
there record signing was Darren Bent for 16 million, Aguero was high in demand in Europe at the time and I don't think Tottenham would have been on his top 10 list somehow.Tottenham never won anything for 3 main reasons, Daniel Levy, managers and players. Daniel Levy has always tried to do things on the cheap, players on low wages and making cheap signings never had a manager who was top level, til Mourinho, though he's it's not prime Mourinho, never made any top level signing, I literally can't think of any world class player they've signed that top European clubs also wanted to get. Blaming other clubs for not having ambition yourself is scapegoating, the fans had ambition, the owner content to appear to be 'challenging'. The reason why they made top 4 in the end wasn't because of Levy's shrewdness, it was because United and Arsenal went into freefall once Fergie left United and Wenger overstaying in his job and Chelsea yo-yoing with different managers. What they have done well is produce players and made them better, Modric (who was not world class when he joined), Bale and Kane are 3 very good examples, but Modric and Bale had to move on because they were not going to win anything and it's a matter of time before Kane follows them. the only two clubs who have really been affected by City have been Man City and Liverpool who have finished runners up to them twice each, but then Man United are a club that are treadwatering in a sea of debt. PSG have made a laughing stock of FFP, yet they've somehow managed to get away from it. |
|
By:
PSG are the worst culprits in all of this FFP garbage
There's no way they could compete at the top table without filthy amounts of oil money I love the French league but they are 2nd tier at best, about level with Portugal |
|
By:
I dont agree with the first half of the Tottenham lad's piece really. A bit whiny and aftertiming. Bale and Modric would clearly still have left.
He's right though in them distorting the market. Without City, VVD or Maguire would have cost about £40m I reckon. Biggest ones obviously are PSG with their Neymar deal, though that worked out very well for us in the fee for Coutinho. But the whole league is affected where decent players like Sigurdsson, Tielemans and Ballet are costing big, big money to smaller clubs while the likes of Grealish, Maddison and Traore will be on the market for Pogba level rates. Interesting thing is what do City do now. Surely they can't go on spending as they have done. Do they do a Chelsea and start buying and loaning a load of kids. Do they change their scouting system completely? |
|
By:
Yes, this is only the beginning of it really and City will cost UEFA tens of millions in legal fees before it is concluded. IMO UEFA will not want the validity of their rules tested and run the risk of having to pay their own and City's legal fees if they lose, so it will be settled for money only and no ban. I think UEFA want to punish City for the content of the emails rather than be seen to be letting them go without standing up for themselves as they would look ridiculous ans it would make a complete mockery of FFP if they did nothing.
I don't think City have to do much going forward. They can continue spending but need to get more players/wages off the books who don't contribute much and won't be much of a loss to the squad and they've been doing that more in the last few years anyway. They were basically in the clear for this period until the emails came out and that's what caused UEFA to reopen the case as it was clear from the emails that they had cooked the books and lied to UEFA. PSG are just as if not more ridiculous but their main guy is also on the UEFA board and there is no real willingness to take on them or City imo, it's just that UEFA had to respond to the emails. City are already up there with Chelsea in terms of the young players they sign and they have made large profits from selling them in the last few years which they weren't doing in the period they are being sanctioned for. They already have their house in order a lot more than they did during that period. |
|
By:
If UEFA dont get ban upheld there done.....
Laughing stock. |
|
By:
Remember man utd were quick to accuse City of financial doping, like as soon as their reign of financial superiority had been extinguished. Mainly due to the way they sold the club. Seemed they wanted new rules implemented on city when they (utd)ran out of cash.cant say I understand the fair play rules as seems its not a level playing feild and never has been, ffs real Madrid complaining about other clubs financial fairness, ffs yor avin a jiraffe.
|
|
By:
Spanish government money a helluva lot cleaner than City or PSG money....
|
|
By:
if something isn't done football as we know it is finished
the only teams able to compete will be the tope ten elite and the rest will be about survival, its a piss take when the champions league is full of teams who were third or fourth and genuine champions need to play three games to qualify like say dutch league , due to a system where the more cash you have the more your able to earn apart from supporters , how many on Saturday watched the Forest v WBA game instead of the other 12 30 kick off in the supposed worlds greatest league ? |
|
By:
Everything that you ever wanted to know about financial fair play but were afraid to ask
 https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Tech/uefaorg/General/02/26/77/91/2267791_DOWNLOAD.pdf |
|
By:
United never ran out of cash, have you not seen how much they've spent recently? Their owner sucks money out of the club and they still generate a bucketload more than anyone else in the league despite that, including City if you put market values on City's sponsorships. City have barely outspent them over the last 5 years while their owner has pumped hundreds of millions in and the Glazers have taken hundreds of millions out. United's revenues are arms-length and genuine because they are one of the biggest clubs in the world.
Liverpool blow out of the water any argument that the only teams able to compete will be the richest teams. Dortmund and Atletico have been competitive for a good while on much lower budgets than PL clubs too. If you want to break into the elite you should have to be successful and well-run on and off the pitch for a sustained period like those 3 cclubs have been, not just be bankrolled with state money to bridge the gap other teams have taken decades to build for themselves by being successful and well run. Real were bankrolled by the King for years but that was before FFP was introduced and there were no rules against it, that is the difference. |
|
By:
Elvis bankrolled Real Madrid
 |
|
By:
https://www.thescore.com/uefa/news/1907746/
european-soccer-is-crumbling-behind-uefas-champions-league-facade |
|
By:
That article is about distribution of Euro prize money which is an entirely separate issue to FFP and entirely irrelevant to PL clubs, all of whom make more money from the PL alone than most other Euro clubs who do well in Europe, never mind the ones who don't. And even more irrelevant to a perennial CL club like City, which this thread is about. The fact that Euro leagues, including the PL, are suffering from CL prize money distribution is completely irrelevant to City's case.
What is City and its fans' obsession with attacking UEFA? Attack the messenger, ignore the message. When the emails were leaked do you think UEFA had any option other than to reopen the case they had already closed without banning City? Do you think UEFA had any option other than to ban you when you refused to engage with them after they reopened the case? Why haven't you channeled even 1% of your energy into the cretins who wrote the emails, cooked the books and then refused to engage with UEFA, acting as if they are above the law and answerable to nobody even though they signed up to FFP and the FFP process? The people who claim that their finances are in order and that the emails were 'taken out of context' but refuse to explain how that is or how the finances are in order? WTF did you expect UEFA to do? |
|
By:
Shouldn't UEFA be open to any scutiny? That piece is just one example that shows UEFA are not interested in anything that does not protect the established elite "Basically, these plans promote a closed-off system that protects the established elite. It's no surprise that the scheme was formed with pressure from the prestigious European Club Association, a group headed by Juventus owner Andrea Agnelli."
City welcomed UEFA re-opening the case. Stolen documentation of course is not normally permissable in any court. When you say City refused to engage with them what do you mean? City provided UEFA with it's evidence. I have no idea if the emails are even genuine, taken out of context, or whether they prove City have cooked the books or not so why would I channel any energy into that when there is CAS and/or courts that will make that decision with more information than I have. I wouldn't take UEFA's word for it if they said the sun would come up tomorrow. You say City acted as if they are above the law, you don't know that as you haven't seen any of the evidence, as I haven't. UEFA are rules not law. Whether FFP is legal or not has never been challenged in a court. I haven't seen City's 200 pages of documentation provided to UEFA as their evidence so how can I comment about the people that claim their finances are in order? If City have broken the rules then they deserve to be banned, I have already said that. |
|
By:
I have no clue to their guilt or innocence however it’s all going to be decided one way or the other I imagine the prem league will await the final decision then if found guilty will act upon it
I’m guessing they will start the following season after the result with a point deduction and a fine not sure if they will be stripped of ant historic titles personally don’t think they should be |
|
By:
well UEFA has seen the evidence provided by City and decided they are guilty. They are the governing body after all whether City like it or not.
why did City sign up to the FFP rules if they thought they weren't legal FFS |
|
By:
rothko, may I ask why you think there is a UEFA rule that limits the amount of money an owner can invest in their club?
(I am aware there is the rule, and that City may have broken it) |
|
By:
Manchester City
@ManCity "The fans can be sure of two things. "The first one is that the allegations are false. And the second is that we will do everything that can be done to prove so." Manchester City CEO, Ferran Soriano |
|
By:
City have impliedly verified that the emails are genuine by stating that they were 'taken out of context'. That wasn't smart imo.
If you have 'irrefutable evidence' that you have not breached FFP then you don't agree to a settlement and squad retrictions as City did years ago, you hand over that evidence and then you fight to clear your good name. You make a settlement when you know there is a breach and want to limit the fallout from it. This matter should have been dealt with and City full vindicated 4 years ago if they did nothing wrong. Ask yourself why that didn't happen? There is only one answer. I don't know why you keep asking people why they think there is a UEFA rule that limits owner spending? Do you actually think that is relevent? Because you are deluded if you do. The fact is the rule has been long in place, City agreed to comply with it and with the sanction process as every club in Euro comps has to in order to get a licence. And now they have refused to engage fully with that process, claiming it is unfair and have left UEFA with no option but to ban them. I don't see why you can have any issue whatsoever with UEFA in doing that - they 100% had to do it. Direct your ire at the cloak and dagger dishonest mugs running your club and tarnishing its good name. |
|
By:
Man City Xtra
@City_Xtr · 25s BREAKING: Pep Guardiola has signed a new contract extension with Manchester City until 2023! |
|
By:
I agree lurka, City should have taken UEFA to the cleaners years ago.
|
|
By:
"I don't know why you keep asking people why they think there is a UEFA rule that limits owner spending? Do you actually think that is relevent? Because you are deluded if you do."
I never said it was relevant to the City situation. I just asked why you thought there was a restriction on owner investment in the FFP rules. I guess you don't want to reply to the question. |
|
By:
Lol they don't have the evidence to take them to the cleaners, they are pretending they do and are claiming they have a dossier on other clubs finances/sponsorships, which is completely irrelevant to their case with CAS by the way. What they are doing is claiming that they have a big stick to beat UEFA with but refusing to show them the size of the stick. It is a common tactic used to negotiate a settlement in legal cases. Another word for it is bluffing.
|
|
By:
I have replied to that question before. It is to stop petrostates and billionaires fastracking decades of success and being well run by financial doping.
|
|
By:
Thank you. Is that not in breach of EU anti-competition law?
|
|
By:
Or in other words it is to protect the Elite establishment?
|
|
By:
It clearly doesn't protect the elite establishment though does it? City and PSG wouldn't be perennial CL KO stage clubs if it did. City wouldn't even be in the CL at all. They've managed to break into that group by having petrodollars pumped in for years and outspend the biggest clubs in the world.
The fact is the rules are toothless, ineffective and very easy to circumvent unless you are stupid enough to get caught committing fraud. That's why you should be very angry at the mugs running your club and not UEFA and I reckon it's only a matter of time before your owner comes to that conclusion. Liverpool weren't an elite Euro club in terms of finances when Klopp took over and he's trumped the whole lot of them on a fraction of their spending. Why can't you strive to be a well-run club instead of trying to outspend everyone else to get there? I've no idea whether the rules are in breach of EU Law as it's never been tested by a court but I'd doubt they are. And I highly doubt City will go there or even genuinely intend to go to CAS with this. What they are doing is making threats that they have a strong case and will go all the way with it solely for the purpose of strengthening their hand in future settlement negotiations with UEFA. |