The Manchester City Thread

[AdamBrunt]

That and lie for long enough and you can do whatever the **** you want

[jpig]

Football is bent. This, and the nonsense of the Covid TV Show that we're currently all participating in, have made it look ridiculous.

I've lost interest. Bet I'm not alone.

[Rob]

That's not a FULL statement, it's a summary of the decision. Let's wait for the full judgement before jumping to conclusions.

People seem to be missing the point that Cas, an independent arbiter, has found no evidence of City cheating the system. The lack of engagement COULD be down to the fact that City were unhappy with the flawed process, which is again, why I'll be interested to read the full report.

Some areas of investigation are time-barred: for whatever reason, UEFA put those rules in place and now it appears that they tried to break them. If this is a technicality, so be it - you can't blame City or any other club for that.

I'm a City fan, but I'm just as interested in the full details as anybody, but it seems like most of the media have been far too trigger-happy these last few months.

[AdamBrunt]

Not sure you are reading the same thing as everyone else. CAS clearly state there are instances where City fiddled the books and the only reason they ignored them is due to time barring; effectively CAS are saying City cheated AND lied about it but because UEFA didn't find out about it til much later then there is nothing CAS can do.

It is a complete and utter sham of a ruling from CAS.

[Rob]

I'm struggling to understand which part of the ruling you find a sham. Are you saying that:-

1. CAS should have allowed UEFA to issue the ban where they haven't got sufficient evidence? Everybody has been saying that it's a black an white slam-dunk of a case for months, yet UEFA haven't managed to convince a panel of judges. So, not so clear cut it seems. Or,
2. UEFA should be allowed to issue bans that contravene their own time-barring rules?

You might not agree with the judgement but you can hardly call it a sham.

[nutter45]

How do you feel about city obstructing the investigation?

[Rob]

Not happy about it, which is why they've been fined 10M for obsructing UEFA.
If they'd have complied fully with the investigation, the fine would also have been overturned and things would have looked even better.

Like I said, it will be interesting to see the full text of the ruling. Most fair-minded people make their decisions based on evidence. The world would be a poorer place if everybody made their judgements on gut feeling, emotion and how close together somebody's eyes were.

It's my gut feeling that lots of football clubs, like businesses, are bent or at least take part in underhand practices. But until there is proof and cases are prosecuted correctly, you can't expect them to be punished.

[GregB]

Originally Posted by jpig

Football is bent. This, and the nonsense of the Covid TV Show that we're currently all participating in, have made it look ridiculous.

I've lost interest. Bet I'm not alone.

Totally agree.

The world is bent. Sport, Politics, etc etc. Money talks and, sad to say, nothing is likely to change that any time soon.

[AdamBrunt]

I reckon UEFA should just go back in - just more recently this time ( and that is the only reason they got off ). It's not as if City stopped cheating in exactly the same way and have been squeaky clean since.

Still - it might also be wise to stick some money on Real Madrid getting a couple of dodgy penalties when the CL resumes next month.

And, ultimately the CL is an invite only competition. The FA can nominate whichever 4 teams they like but UEFA don't have to let them

[Lee Brown]

Originally Posted by AdamBrunt

I reckon UEFA should just go back in - just more recently this time ( and that is the only reason they got off ). It's not as if City stopped cheating in exactly the same way and have been squeaky clean since.

I think that ship has sailed. City ignored FFP (and evidently disguised it) when it was important for them to do so, when they were first building their club/brand.

I think they are now at a point where their cachet is such that they can attract the kind of sponsorship they pretended they could several years ago.

I think FFP can/will stop them spending beyond their legitimate means, but their legitimate means are now substantial.

[AdamBrunt]

That is an interesting point. Mind you how long were those dodgy sponsorship deals for ?

Also, City are not a big marketing draw - that's what kicked off the whole thing in the first place. There was no way City could legitimately bring in such massive sponsorship deals - they don't have the fan base nor global appeal. And, arguably, still don't.

[Lee Brown]

Originally Posted by AdamBrunt

That is an interesting point. Mind you how long were those dodgy sponsorship deals for ?

Also, City are not a big marketing draw - that's what kicked off the whole thing in the first place. There was no way City could legitimately bring in such massive sponsorship deals - they don't have the fan base nor global appeal. And, arguably, still don't.

They absolutely are not the same draw as the the world's biggest teams, but their continued success (and flair) does make then a desirable sponsorship opportunity. Interesting though to see the split between their Gulf sponsors and the rest.

Their lack of success in European competition is arresting their progress though. No doubt it all fixed against them by the 'cabal'

[cheeseypuffs]

So on the face of it, the ruling is that UEFA did not have the evidence to prove anything during the last five years, City are simply found guilty of obstructing the investigation, ie. not giving them access to the information they needed, so just get a slap on the wrists. That doesn't set a precedent for any unscrupulous owners with bucket loads of cash then, surely no one is now going to conceal their accounts in the knowledge that they are likely to get a relatively small fine for it

Nail in the coffin for FFP, what is the point if it's essentially optional and realistically unenforceable Just be done with it and let things run their natural course, lets find out how popular the game really is when only a handful of mega rich entities can afford to exist.

[Rob]

Originally Posted by Lee Brown

Their lack of success in European competition is arresting their progress though. No doubt it all fixed against them by the 'cabal'

Not sure where you get that idea from: there's only one person on these forums who thinks that referees/the FA/other officials are against their team.

Originally Posted by cheeseypuffs

So on the face of it, the ruling is that UEFA did not have the evidence to prove anything during the last five years, City are simply found guilty of obstructing the investigation

I suspect we'll find more on the detail here when the full report is published - whether it relates to a long-term refusal to co-operate or something more recent after UEFA started waving hacked info in the face of the club directors.

[AdamBrunt]

What I find funny is this stance from lots of City fans today that the decision proves City haven't done anything wrong or that even though some "summary" statement clearly states CAS know they cheated there will be another statement saying the exact opposite. And those that don't think still have no problems with City cheating.

Anyone who thinks this decision hasn't just **** all over every other club trying to run in a sustainable manner clearly doesn't give a **** about the future of football. Even worse, in a worse case scenario, this has just signed the death warrant on the Premier League as the top 4/5 clubs ( minus City ) **** off to a Super League taking 90+% of the TV money with them.

[AdamBrunt]

Originally Posted by Lee Brown

They absolutely are not the same draw as the the world's biggest teams, but their continued success (and flair) does make then a desirable sponsorship opportunity. Interesting though to see the split between their Gulf sponsors and the rest.



Their lack of success in European competition is arresting their progress though. No doubt it all fixed against them by the 'cabal'

The split exists between their Gulf sponsors and the rest for one simple reason - the reason for the ban in the first place - the Gulf sponsorships don't really exist or, rather, are massively overinflated. Roughly speaking ... the £100M sponsorship they got from Etihad Airlines, say, is actually made up of £10M from Etihad and £90M from the owners of City

And that's not even starting on how a team with a billion pound squad has one of the lowest wage bills in the Top 6 or how they claim to consistently sell out every home despite clear proof of thousands and thousands of every seats ( those will be the thousands of season tickets bought and paid for by the owners )

And, oh look, one of the 3 men independent CAS panel works for a law firm which relies on the ADUG for a large amount of its business. But there's nothing to see there, everyone move along now LOL

[Lee Brown]

Originally Posted by AdamBrunt

The split exists between their Gulf sponsors and the rest for one simple reason - the reason for the ban in the first place - the Gulf sponsorships don't really exist or, rather, are massively overinflated. Roughly speaking ... the £100M sponsorship they got from Etihad Airlines, say, is actually made up of £10M from Etihad and £90M from the owners of City

This was really my question. Is there any published evidence to show the current percentage split between the Gulf sponsorship and others? If it's still heavily Gulf-led, it would discount any claims of their broader appeal.

The leaks from Der Spiegel were damning, but I suspect City have evaded punishment not because they were 'hacked', but because they covered a period (over 5 years ago) which UEFA apparently now have no power to investigate within their own FFP rules.

There is not really any question they were cheating the system, they just got lucky (or deliberately pushed to delay it?) with the timing of the investigation.

[Rob]

I come on these forums for a bit of reasoned debate, but the blatant tribalism in here is a bit galling sometimes. Adam, you're just making stuff up to fit your narrative now. If the wrongdoing is so obvious, why do you feel the need to makes stuff up and cast aspersions about people you know nothing about?

Can you point me to this £100M Ethihad sponsorship you are referring to? Don't bother, I'll help you out, it's £400M. Now given that this is 4 times the amount that is making you apoplectic, don't you think that a group of lawyers would have spotted if something was clearly wrong.

If you remember correctly, City have already been punished for FFP issues up to 2014 (along with Chelsea IIRC). Do you want them punished again? This is why decisions are made calmly through a legal process as opposed to a bunch of no-Nowts waving pitchforks and burning things down.

[Rob]

Must admit I can't find a sponsorship breakdown, but the £650M Nike deal makes them a bigger sponsor than Etihad.

[AdamBrunt]

Originally Posted by Rob

I come on these forums for a bit of reasoned debate, but the blatant tribalism in here is a bit galling sometimes. Adam, you're just making stuff up to fit your narrative now. If the wrongdoing is so obvious, why do you feel the need to makes stuff up and cast aspersions about people you know nothing about?

Can you point me to this £100M Ethihad sponsorship you are referring to? Don't bother, I'll help you out, it's £400M. Now given that this is 4 times the amount that is making you apoplectic, don't you think that a group of lawyers would have spotted if something was clearly wrong.

If you remember correctly, City have already been punished for FFP issues up to 2014 (along with Chelsea IIRC). Do you want them punished again? This is why decisions are made calmly through a legal process as opposed to a bunch of no-Nowts waving pitchforks and burning things down.

The figures used were clearly an example to demonstrate what was going on

The undeniable facts are ... UEFA, CAS and everybody knows you cheated. You got off on a technicality.

It's funny you mention 2014 as AFAIK that is pretty much what the current case was about - hence the time barring issue today. The idea being that City got off lightly last time because of the stuff that has come out since.

Originally Posted by Rob

Must admit I can't find a sponsorship breakdown, but the £650M Nike deal makes them a bigger sponsor than Etihad.

the difference is ... LFC have the global fan base, history, etc to command such a deal. In 2014, there was no way any legitimate sponsorship deal would plough £400M into City and everybody knew it at the time. They just couldn't understand how UEFA couldn't see it

You won't find any emails, relating to the Nike deal, with LFC telling Nike not worry that they are only actually paying £50M

TBH I am not overly bothered about it from a City perspective. After all, you've been cheating since ADUG took over and it hasn't actually done you much good in relation to you breaking into this cabal City fans think exists and detest, but are so desperate to actually be part ( presumably it won't be so detestable then ). And the decision won't have gone down well at United and Chelsea

It is the smaller clubs that have been **** on and their future that bugs me more about it. It has very little to do with tribalism - there is only one team who benefit from today's decision, every one else who is not effectively owned by a county is worse off ( for want of a better phrase )