Zatman Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 1 minute ago, The_Steve said: There’s nothing in the article to substantiate the claim though as I said a big IF He should come out and deny it as soon as possible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stevo985 Posted June 5 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted June 5 2 minutes ago, WallisFrizz said: They’re rich but they’re not Nation state rich. Our owners might be frustrated with the current rules but I can’t see they’d want to abandon them all. Why on earth wouldn’t they? I think they’d be absolutely **** delighted if the FFP rules were abandoned. Look how hard we’re desperately trying to increase revenue to allow us to spend more money and stay within the rules. And potentially having to sell players just to make sure we don’t break them. They’d be absolutely over the moon if the rules were abandoned 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Very disappointing if true, but also understandable. Hard to take a principled stand when it's against your own interests. It's easy for say, Fulham to be against this because they're not exactly hamstrung by it are they? If anything this would bring other teams down closer to their level. I hate that this might be true, but if it is, it's another indication that our owners are dead serious about achieving success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post duke313 Posted June 5 Popular Post Share Posted June 5 34 minutes ago, wishywashy said: Eugh. 2 10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicho Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 9 minutes ago, Zatman said: if its true and Nas is supporting City then I hope he leaves and never comes back. big IF This law suit is separate from their charges it’s more to do with input of money rather than the actual charges which is corruption of the books. Although in cities case this input is also dodgy and over inflated sponsorship. It’s no surprise to me that our owners would want the means to put more money into the club and any doubling down by the league would be a problem to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lochheads twin Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 I do hope we do not side with City on this . It would be against everything I think this club should stand for. UTV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Dog Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Supporting our new billionaire owners right now during this new 'friendship' link with City might sound like a nice option currently, but let us not forget the shitshow owners we've had before who didn't have the same amount of resources. I wouldn't fancy free spending under Deadly, Lerner (MON tried) or Xia. FFP exists for a reason. It's not 100% right how it works, and it still favours creative accounting and rule bending, and that needs to be punished appropriately, but I'd hate for us to go bust because some bandit comes down with his fake millions and ruins the club. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stevo985 Posted June 5 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted June 5 It’s also worth pointing out that being sympathetic towards Man City in terms of not liking the FFP rules is not the same thing as defending their cheating. 9 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted June 5 Moderator Share Posted June 5 I thought it was weird when people were reporting that Everton were supporting City in trying to have owner related sponsorship deals freed from oversight. Everton don't even have owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPJCB Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 We know what city would do if this rule was removed: they’d pump a load of money in via Abu Dhabi based sponsors. What exactly would we be able to do in the same circumstance? We’re not a nation state. Would our owners use some random companies to put in extra cash? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted June 5 VT Supporter Share Posted June 5 1 minute ago, JPJCB said: We know what city would do if this rule was removed: they’d pump a load of money in via Abu Dhabi based sponsors. What exactly would we be able to do in the same circumstance? We’re not a nation state. Would our owners use some random companies to put in extra cash? City wouldn’t need to do that if the rules were removed. That’s the point. They could just pump whatever money in they wanted. Our owners probably want to do the same if we’re honest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPJCB Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Just now, Stevo985 said: City wouldn’t need to do that if the rules were removed. That’s the point. They could just pump whatever money in they wanted. Our owners probably want to do the same if we’re honest Are you sure that’s right? Isn’t their lawsuit specifically about associated party transactions? I guess my main question is how exactly we’d benefit from that rule being removed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyblade Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 This game is cooked. Whoever spends the most money on average tends to have the most success, but some of the teams with the most money are not allowed to spend as much because reasons. So not only is it a flawed system, but it's a flawed system that is also a closed shop to all but a select few teams. It all sucks honestly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 15 hours ago, Delphinho123 said: Smacks of them getting wind of what the punishment might be and their mindset shifting to a ‘let’s burn it all down’ approach rather than playing innocent. The other 19 clubs have a huge part to play in this. The PL will be under huge pressure from the current government to drop charges given they need UAE investment but the PL will be emboldened if clubs start to take a serious stance alongside them. I’ve always wondered why teams don’t just come together and refuse to play them… The general election on 4th July might play a huge part in this too. I have a feeling a new Labour government will make it harder for the UAE to bribe and pay their way out of this. To be honest, if I was Starner, I’d be quite vocal about this situation more and use it to his advantage. Not to turn this into a politics thread but I don't know why you think that. Starmer is notably colder on the idea of the football regulator for instance, which may now be dead in the water. Absolutely nothing that I've seen from him suggests 'costly battle standing up to a government we sell weapons systems to'. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villarule123 Posted June 5 VT Supporter Share Posted June 5 Can we please somehow fluke a PL/CL win next season so I can be done with this shite sport. This isn't the football I fell in love with. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPJCB Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 6 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Not to turn this into a politics thread but I don't know why you think that. Starmer is notably colder on the idea of the football regulator for instance, which may now be dead in the water. Absolutely nothing that I've seen from him suggests 'costly battle standing up to a government we sell weapons systems to'. You’re right that he’ll want to pick his battles but my guess is that starmer will have more of an instinct for this being an issue people care about than Sunak or Johnson did/do. It’s then just a matter of fans, other clubs and the media kicking up enough of a fuss for labour to decide it is a battle worth fighting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osmark86 Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 5 minutes ago, villarule123 said: Can we please somehow fluke a PL/CL win next season so I can be done with this shite sport. This isn't the football I fell in love with. Yeah, transfer records of £100 million isn't what got me into the sport either. Just another victim of runaway capitalism. Seriously sick of it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Townsend Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 Aston Villa has been impacted by Man City cheating their way ahead of us since they were bought in 2008. We should not be backing them here even if it does let us spend more of our own dough. Let the cheaters go fk themselves first. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 46 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: It’s also worth pointing out that being sympathetic towards Man City in terms of not liking the FFP rules is not the same thing as defending their cheating. of course it is, they are cheating scumbags and anybody supporting them are pretty much enablers. Its like defending Lance Armstrong Tour de France victories 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted June 5 Moderator Share Posted June 5 I was reading that the Premier league have had to up their budget for legal representation and cases from £2m a year to £10m a year over the last couple of years in order to fight Citeh and their army of KC's - do we fund that? I mean does each club (including City) have to chip in to fund the league's expenses, or do they cut a chunk out of the TV and licensing deals before it goes to the clubs? How does the league finance itself and do we get to write our half a million a year off against PSR? City are making it hard enough without forcing everyone else to spend half a million a year fighting them in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts