Man City - the new bitters?

[Stickman]

The baldy one"s press conference coming up soon wonder if any journalst will ask him about the players singing ? 

[Mcfaggen]

3 hours ago, Barnesey said:

I was talking to someone who understands the situation better than me. He told me, if Citeh have broken UEFA rules with regard to FFP, they have also broken PL rules. He also said the PL have no balls and won't pursue it.

I thought I read earlier today that there was no question they've broken PL FFP rules... in fact, I'm not even sure they've broken UEFA FFP rules, but the investigators are working on the angle that they misled them and it's the lying that they're hanging their hat on rather than the ££ numbers. 

[VladimirIlyich]

2 hours ago, Code said:

Allegri is finished at Juventus. Guardiola next?

 

I fuckin hope so.

 

Press conference in Torino on Sunday.

Is he? They did buy Ronaldo and missed out on winning the CL so I suppose its a possibility.

[The Woolster]

2 hours ago, DaveT said:

The PL are supposed to be investigating City..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47501423 .......but it's all gone suspiciously quiet. 

 

Hmm, there are 2 main Premier League FFP rules.

 

There is a rolling £105m maximum losses combined over previous 3 years. City have made a profit the last 2 years, I don't think there is any chance of them breaching this.

 

And wages can only increase by £7m a year out of the increased Premier League distributions. Increased revenues from other sources can be used to to go above the £7m mark. Maybe there is a chance the breached this, I dunno

[VladimirIlyich]

10 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

 

Hmm, there are 2 main Premier League FFP rules.

 

There is a rolling £105m maximum losses combined over previous 3 years. City have made a profit the last 2 years, I don't think there is any chance of them breaching this.

 

And wages can only increase by £7m a year out of the increased Premier League distributions. Increased revenues from other sources can be used to to go above the £7m mark. Maybe there is a chance the breached this, I dunno

Doesn't sound like they couldn't have easily got around those potential hurdles to be honest.

[Beno]

Love to know how they cook the books,so they make a profit. 

No way is that club making a profit without the Arab oil money propping up all their sponsership deals.

Can't sell 10,000 semi-final tickets, put FA Cup Final tickets on general sale, and the ground has thousand of empty seats most games.

No World Wide appeal or shirt sales etc, etc etc.

And on the other side they spend and pay mega bucks on players, without not much coming back in sales.

[Guest Alex_K]

Yeah it makes absolute zero sense. They spent, what, 200 million net the year before last? And a further 150 million net the previous season? Plus a whole squad of elite players on elite salaries. Its absolutely nuts to believe Manchester City is a profitable commercial enterprise. What - in the same way Lazio, Parma and the likes were through the 90s and 00s?

[aws]

50 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

 

Hmm, there are 2 main Premier League FFP rules.

 

There is a rolling £105m maximum losses combined over previous 3 years. City have made a profit the last 2 years, I don't think there is any chance of them breaching this.

 

And wages can only increase by £7m a year out of the increased Premier League distributions. Increased revenues from other sources can be used to to go above the £7m mark. Maybe there is a chance the breached this, I dunno

But what if (as alleged) they're only turning a profit by cooking the sponsorship books and are depressing the club's wages bill by hiving off part of their wage cost to sponsors or to other companies in the group?  The trouble is all this will be buried deep and I doubt that the PL has the inclination to do much digging.  

[The Woolster]

They've just signed a kit deal with Puma for £65m a year (That's all the teams in the City Group I think, but City themselves will get most of that) which they will be able to point at and say that commercial deals are in line with the very top end of the market.

 

And I'm not sure that the Premier League has the same rules about inflated commercial income either

[suzy]

3 hours ago, Stickman said:

The baldy one"s press conference coming up soon wonder if any journalst will ask him about the players singing ? 

I wasn’t paying full attention but Pep did say something along the lines of ‘if any offence was caused it wasn’t meant ‘

[The Guest]

It was one of those classic fake apologies.  Shove it up your arse you bald fraud.

[Creator Supreme]

53 minutes ago, The Woolster said:

They've just signed a kit deal with Puma for £65m a year (That's all the teams in the City Group I think, but City themselves will get most of that) which they will be able to point at and say that commercial deals are in line with the very top end of the market.

 

And I'm not sure that the Premier League has the same rules about inflated commercial income either

New York City FC will get none of that, they have to wear Adidas the same as the rest of the MLS 

[Anubis]

11 minutes ago, The Guest said:

It was one of those classic fake apologies.  Shove it up your arse you bald fraud.

Yes. I’ve even seen a Spurs fan having a go at him. It was along the lines we were only celebrating but sorry if any offence was caused. Missing the point that you don’t celebrate your own wins by singing about other team’s fans being battered or referring to their tradgedy. Couldn’t agree with your assessment more. Hope we play that to the team every time we face them in the future.

[Redder Lurtz]

1 hour ago, aws said:

But what if (as alleged) they're only turning a profit by cooking the sponsorship books and are depressing the club's wages bill by hiving off part of their wage cost to sponsors or to other companies in the group?  The trouble is all this will be buried deep and I doubt that the PL has the inclination to do much digging.  

They don't have to dig far. The Panama Papers revealed that one of their sponsors, an Abu Dhabi construction firm, was owned by the same bloke who owns the club. Seven million quid, to be precise. Uncannily the same as one of the figures quoted above. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/nov/11/manchester-city-owners-accused-sportswashing-gulf-image

[The Guest]

45 minutes ago, Anubis said:

Yes. I’ve even seen a Spurs fan having a go at him. It was along the lines we were only celebrating but sorry if any offence was caused. Missing the point that you don’t celebrate your own wins by singing about other team’s fans being battered or referring to their tradgedy. Couldn’t agree with your assessment more. Hope we play that to the team every time we face them in the future.

I don’t know why somebody isn’t pulling him up there and then and saying to him but they were singing about injuring Salah and people being battered in the streets.  Fair enough you want to point out it wasn’t about Cox which I don’t think it was but it was about some other people getting attacked whilst having a meal in Kiev but because none of them have been reported to have life changing head injuries that makes it okay?  Fucking dickhead encouraging dickhead behaviour and it’s down to jealousy, nothing else.

[Ne Moe Imya]

I used to have a rather soft spot for City fans, but with the money has come the glory-hunters and when you're a small fanbase to start with it doesn't take many glory-hunters before they're in the majority. 

 

Just had an argument on twitter with a City fan who would make any of the bloos look rational by comparison. I don't know why I even bothered, but I did and it's like trying to talk with a Flat Earther. The more obvious the evidence the less he believed it.

 

He's convinced that 1. City are pure as the driven snow and every pound of their sponsorships is legitimate, but ALSO 2. it wouldn't matter if they did violate FFP because FFP is unfair and only designed to keep them down so it would be fine to break the rules anyway.

[suzy]

3 hours ago, The Guest said:

It was one of those classic fake apologies.  Shove it up your arse you bald fraud.

Fair enough, like I said I wasn’t really paying attention, just responding to someone saying he wouldn’t he asked about it.

[The Guest]

23 minutes ago, suzy said:

Fair enough, like I said I wasn’t really paying attention, just responding to someone saying he wouldn’t he asked about it.

I wasn’t calling you a bald fraud Suzy!

[suzy]

1 hour ago, The Guest said:

I wasn’t calling you a bald fraud Suzy!

Haha!

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

Guardiola's apology stopped just short of him actually asking for the City players to be apologised to for suggesting they'd intentionally sing bad taste songs. 

 

The knobhead. 

[aws]

They've spent a year crying that their coach got slightly damaged but are now celeberating people getting battered. Classy. 

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

The City fans aren’t the City fans of old, they are now spoilt mainly nouveau fans and glory hunting balloons who would change club at the drop of a hat.

A lot of so called supporters are more interested in social media wind-ups and goading than anything to do with the team they supposedly support.

Truly the shitness of modern football. In a way i’m glad i’m out of it. I frequent our Everton thread against my better judgement.

[Red_or_Dead]

Excellent article in the independent really laying into city and their gobshite fans.  About fucking time.

 

https://t.co/j0y635Q1i8

 

Apologies if posted before.

[dockers_strike]

1 hour ago, aws said:

They've spent a year crying that their coach got slightly damaged but are now celeberating people getting battered. Classy. 

Nail on head. Not only city fans but also the everton bandwagon jumpers along with loads of other fans bang on about the disgraceful coach attack and suddenly being 'battered in the street' and 'victims of it all' is casually swept aside from any criticism.

 

Even then if it is addressed it's a case of 'well you attacked the coach so getting battered in the street is just what you deserve.' Well, that's ok then. Except it isnt.

 

I used to go to Maine Road with a couple of my City mates in the late 60's early 70's. It makes me shake my head when I read city fans saying Liverpool 'bought' success through the 70's. Oh really, so what about city in the late 60's early 70's then? I guess that's different, eh?

 

Im also finding it distasteful the mantra coming out of city and even their ex players that 'no one wanted liverpool to win' with shaun wright phillips (who?) weighing in with such comments. When did football become like this?

 

We seem to be having a case of absolute (footballing) power corrupts absolutely.

 

Some folk, even on here, say to just ignore it. But how can you ignore football revisionism and the lie repeated so often it becomes the truth? There's something rotten in football now since the likes of Abramovic and Mansour came in and started throwing their money around in unprecedented amounts.

 

Not even united and ferguson spoke of such shit about Liverpool outspending everyone in the 60s, 70s and 80s. I can only think of the season we bought Barnes, Aldridge and Beardsley where that was correct but even then, that was funded by Rush's transfer plus £500,000 cash.

[Davelfc]

We earned our cash by being successful and attracted players because we were so. They were a shit yo-yo club that is now able to pay crazy amounts in fees and wages with no consequences if they buy a lemon. They didn’t earn it, they’re killing the game along with the media who pick and choose between football facts pre sky and post sky depending on what suits them.

 

someone said if they win today we will play in that farce that is the community shield. I won’t go and I’d love to see a boycott of it. Just legitimising the cheating if we play in it or attend.