Page 13 of 41 FirstFirst ... 36789101112131415161718192023 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 410

Thread: Manchester City banned

  1. #121
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Teesside
    Posts
    14,894
    Good points Taksin. City seem to have gone a bit further though, maybe just being too greedy and that's possibly why UEFA have thrown the book at them. They don't have the clout of the big clubs, it's difficult to see UEFA doing this to say Real or Barca, if they did they'd be biting the hand that feeds them. City aren't in that category so UEFA can use them to set an example. PSG should be next.

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    City of Self Doubt
    Posts
    16,839
    @Taksin what about Tottenham? They've demonstrated wonderfully that you can compete with the top four with some good investment, luck and shrewd transfers.
    Etiam si omnes, ego non

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    24,832
    Quote Originally Posted by justme View Post
    Just read this and someone's response to it made me laugh

    This could open a door for United. Things starts to look brighter for the reds of Manchester.

    Salford City will win the Premiership before United.
    I should probably take this tangent of discussion to the "Demise" thread (and indeed probably after this post will so as not to derail this discussion too much) but when we chat about things relevant to United "coming back" for example, a common parameter should be worked out.

    I don't think anyone fears them winning 13 titles in 18 years any time soon. But I think them finishing Top Four once, investing, finishing Top Four again, stabilising a little and becoming a regular Top Four side again (like Spurs were for a prolonged period) is entirely possible.

    Spurs, much as it's fun to mock them, got to a Champion's League Final. I don't want the Mancs anywhere near any type of European Cup Final (their Europa League consistency keeps their co-efficient good) or having any long runs in Europe or any Top Four finishes really - as it only takes the one to open a door to stabilisation.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Balinkay View Post
    @Taksin what about Tottenham? They've demonstrated wonderfully that you can compete with the top four with some good investment, luck and shrewd transfers.
    They’ve never been small like West Brom, more of a slow burn. And I’m not sure how they’ve financed the stadium - loans I’d hazard a guess. Loans put the club in debt so presumably that keeps FFP happy in one way or another.

    Although, should it? If you borrow money you are overspending just as you are if your mate gives it to you. Have FFP rules constrained Tottenham’s investment in players? If so that would be a terrible thing to do to a club that just invested heavily in its infrastructure - constrain its ability to compete and pay off the loan.

    Football is one of the very few pure free market industries around. We all want to be free to create the most successful club we can. Why should a bunch of remote, money draining old wankers have the right to limit our progress? Only if they are genuinely helping the sport as a whole, which is highly questionable.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    34,176
    I really think we should be a little more charitable about this situation. They may now have one or two looking for a way out and we should help them move on, any Liverpool fans in their ranks. So we need to take all on the list below.

    List of Liverpool fans among Manchester City’s ranks :

    1. Kevin De Bruyne.


    That is all.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    City of Self Doubt
    Posts
    16,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Taksin View Post
    They’ve never been small like West Brom, more of a slow burn. And I’m not sure how they’ve financed the stadium - loans I’d hazard a guess. Loans put the club in debt so presumably that keeps FFP happy in one way or another.

    Although, should it? If you borrow money you are overspending just as you are if your mate gives it to you. Have FFP rules constrained Tottenham’s investment in players? If so that would be a terrible thing to do to a club that just invested heavily in its infrastructure - constrain its ability to compete and pay off the loan.

    Football is one of the very few pure free market industries around. We all want to be free to create the most successful club we can. Why should a bunch of remote, money draining old wankers have the right to limit our progress? Only if they are genuinely helping the sport as a whole, which is highly questionable.
    The point of FFP wasn't to stop City and PSG from pumping insane amounts of money into their clubs. It was to stop the Anzhis and Monacos of this world - teams overspending in a way that puts them at risk of collapse. E.g. funding your stadium with bad loans and overspending on players in a desperate bid to repay your gamble.

    Hence I'd assume creating too much debt is against the rules of FFP, though I'm not an expert. If only n4c were still around...

    On the not small bit - were Man City small by that definition? I'm too young to have much of an overview.
    Etiam si omnes, ego non

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    belfast
    Posts
    16,826
    Quote Originally Posted by miller0863 View Post
    I really think we should be a little more charitable about this situation. They may now have one or two looking for a way out and we should help them move on, any Liverpool fans in their ranks. So we need to take all on the list below.

    List of Liverpool fans among Manchester City’s ranks :

    1. Kevin De Bruyne.


    That is all.
    I'd have him over Mbappe any day. We sold them Sterling so at least there has been movement of players between the club's before.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    4,010
    Quote Originally Posted by Balinkay View Post
    The point of FFP wasn't to stop City and PSG from pumping insane amounts of money into their clubs. It was to stop the Anzhis and Monacos of this world - teams overspending in a way that puts them at risk of collapse. E.g. funding your stadium with bad loans and overspending on players in a desperate bid to repay your gamble.

    Hence I'd assume creating too much debt is against the rules of FFP, though I'm not an expert. If only n4c were still around...

    On the not small bit - were Man City small by that definition? I'm too young to have much of an overview.
    They were in long term decline. They benefitted from not only the Arab ownership but they were given the brand new stadium by the city after the commonwealth games. Before that they were a long term laughing stock. Even their fans used to laugh at how bad they were. They had recently been down to the third division if memory serves me.

    I’m not sure if FFP was safeguarding bankruptcy as you say - happy to be proven wrong. I think there’s are new anti - bankruptcy rules and regulations but FFP was introduced as some attempt to stop teams getting ahead by investing unfairly. That had to invest only what they earned.

    I’d like anyone here to explain exactly what city have been found guilty of. What are the actual numbers and details?

  9. #129
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    23,303
    Think spurs will get that 5th spot

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    City of Self Doubt
    Posts
    16,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Taksin View Post
    They were in long term decline. They benefitted from not only the Arab ownership but they were given the brand new stadium by the city after the commonwealth games. Before that they were a long term laughing stock. Even their fans used to laugh at how bad they were. They had recently been down to the third division if memory serves me.

    I’m not sure if FFP was safeguarding bankruptcy as you say - happy to be proven wrong. I think there’s are new anti - bankruptcy rules and regulations but FFP was introduced as some attempt to stop teams getting ahead by investing unfairly. That had to invest only what they earned.

    I’d like anyone here to explain exactly what city have been found guilty of. What are the actual numbers and details?
    From what I'm seeing on twitter the major issue is that they consciously presented false data to UEFA, not their FFP breaches.

    On FFP - it's difficult to say, I agree. The way I understood it was that it was meant to guarantee the financial health of clubs. The side effect of that was that they could no longer be used as richmen's playthings. Could be wrong though. And whether the officially stated mission is the one they had in mind is different matter entirely.
    Etiam si omnes, ego non

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •