Sportswash! - Let’s oil stare at Manchester City!

[bielesibub]

I've seen loads of mentions about fines and point deductions, what about reparation type payments to all the clubs that have lost out over the time due to them cheating? I wonder if teams could get together and do some GLO/class action type thing to get damages?

[PieFacE]

2 hours ago, MarkLillis said:

ITransfer ban, salary cap and a big fine will stunt further growth until the playing field has been levelled imo.

Aren't salary caps essentially illegal? Pretty sure i've read that somewhere.

No idea how fining the richest club in the world would stunt any type of growth tbh.

[pas5898]

1 minute ago, bielesibub said:

I've seen loads of mentions about fines and point deductions, what about reparation type payments to all the clubs that have lost out over the time due to them cheating? I wonder if teams could get together and do some GLO/class action type thing to get damages?

Yep.- i've said here previously - it's not just the cheating to elevate themselves; they detracted from a lot of other clubs. Cheating allowed them to:

Buy Leeds best player / captain (Philips). I genuinely believe he would have helped them stay up. They didn't need him

Buy Bournemouths best player (Ake) as a squad / backup player. They didn't need him

Buy Wolves best player at the time (Nunes). They don't need him.

Buy Evertons best player (Stones).

Buy Leicesters best player (Mahrez)

Buy our captain and best player as effectively a marketing ploy.

IF they are proven to have done wrong - then it's open time for litigious clubs.

 

 

 

 

[villa4europe]

27 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

Aren't salary caps essentially illegal? Pretty sure i've read that somewhere.

No idea how fining the richest club in the world would stunt any type of growth tbh.

per player under the EU yes

as a team / squad, no

the law is that you cant limit an individuals ability to earn

[Genie]

Formula 1 has budget caps which include driver salaries I believe.

[Avfc96]

11 minutes ago, Genie said:

Formula 1 has budget caps which include driver salaries I believe.

F1 has a budget cap. But the top 3 highest paid employees are excluded from that. Which is typically either the team principal or technical director and then the two drivers. Along with some other relatively minor things like marketing and travel costs.

[villa4europe]

the F1 budget cap is per team, same as yank sports

and its something they should have done a long time ago, they always hid behind the individual thing, for me personally its not city paying KDB or Haaland £400k a week (!) that kills it its that they can pay grealish £300k a week to be a rotation player or Nunes £150k a week to start 10 games a season, its the wages when you get to 4th or 5th choice that's the killer

the moment scott sinclair went from swansea's best player to man citys reserve teamer (was it year 1 they didnt even register him or year 2?) for £60k a week they should have drawn the line

[TheStagMan]

37 minutes ago, Avfc96 said:

F1 has a budget cap. But the top 3 highest paid employees are excluded from that. Which is typically either the team principal or technical director and then the two drivers. Along with some other relatively minor things like marketing and travel costs.

and catering, don't forget that catering is excluded. Oh, wait!

[foreveryoung]

Said it from the start. I think they'll get a big dirty fine and something weak like a transfer ban or little points deduction.

I actually think it's already been agreed with the Premier League.

[JPJCB]

Rodri claiming that the players might go on strike because of too many games. In all seriousness I can understand the problem- there are a lot of games and a relentless demand for more to meet what global audiences want (surely one reason for change in CL format). But it is ultimately a choice for clubs to play particular players. You don’t see kelvin phillips threatening he might go on strike: it was city who refused to play him as an alternative for Rodri and therefore give him rest.

If they were to implement a rule change to reduce the number of games played I’d like to see them do so via capping the number of games that clubs can play individual players for - e.g you can’t play a single player in more than 50 game. That would force the big clubs to actually rotate their squads which should in principle make the game more even at the margin 

[Kiwivillan]

1 hour ago, JPJCB said:

You don’t see kelvin phillips threatening he might go on strike

If he tried would probably tweak something and be out injured

[HanoiVillan]

10 hours ago, villa4europe said:

thats an interesting thought which i've not seen discussed 

forget transfer bans, points deductions, relegations, titles stripped etc etc what if they banned the city hierarchy from football? or outright forced them to sell?

I've said this a few times on here. Forcing a sale would be the only appropriate punishment in a case where they are found guilty on multiple charges, especially where those charges are themselves potentially criminal (ie, accounting fraud). 

I don't really care about the other stuff, you just have to remove the owners and take their toy off them. (If that's the conclusion of the panel, of course)

[HanoiVillan]

7 hours ago, pas5898 said:

Yep.- i've said here previously - it's not just the cheating to elevate themselves; they detracted from a lot of other clubs. Cheating allowed them to:

Buy Leeds best player / captain (Philips). I genuinely believe he would have helped them stay up. They didn't need him

Buy Bournemouths best player (Ake) as a squad / backup player. They didn't need him

Buy Wolves best player at the time (Nunes). They don't need him.

Buy Evertons best player (Stones).

Buy Leicesters best player (Mahrez)

Buy our captain and best player as effectively a marketing ploy.

IF they are proven to have done wrong - then it's open time for litigious clubs.

 

 

 

 

All those players had a choice about moving. They made the decision they felt was best for their careers and their finances. No-one was kidnapped, blindfolded and thrown into the back of a van. 

[MikeMcKenna]

They need to be hammered. The PL will begin a slow but certain decline if they do not receive a massive points deduction. 

[jimmygreaves]

12 hours ago, bielesibub said:

I've seen loads of mentions about fines and point deductions, what about reparation type payments to all the clubs that have lost out over the time due to them cheating? I wonder if teams could get together and do some GLO/class action type thing to get damages?

Not just clubs but individuals too. How many players and management lost out on contracted bonuses because they didn't win the league and/or cup because of City. 

[TreeVillan]

15 hours ago, pas5898 said:

Yep.- i've said here previously - it's not just the cheating to elevate themselves; they detracted from a lot of other clubs. Cheating allowed them to:

Buy Leeds best player / captain (Philips). I genuinely believe he would have helped them stay up. They didn't need him

Buy Bournemouths best player (Ake) as a squad / backup player. They didn't need him

Buy Wolves best player at the time (Nunes). They don't need him.

Buy Evertons best player (Stones).

Buy Leicesters best player (Mahrez)

Buy our captain and best player as effectively a marketing ploy.

IF they are proven to have done wrong - then it's open time for litigious clubs.

 

 

 

 

Most of those clubs were happy to sell as they made a decent wedge. A decade before and those players would have been getting tapped up by United players. 

[Mic09]

9 hours ago, JPJCB said:

Rodri claiming that the players might go on strike because of too many games. In all seriousness I can understand the problem- there are a lot of games and a relentless demand for more to meet what global audiences want (surely one reason for change in CL format). But it is ultimately a choice for clubs to play particular players. You don’t see kelvin phillips threatening he might go on strike: it was city who refused to play him as an alternative for Rodri and therefore give him rest.

If they were to implement a rule change to reduce the number of games played I’d like to see them do so via capping the number of games that clubs can play individual players for - e.g you can’t play a single player in more than 50 game. That would force the big clubs to actually rotate their squads which should in principle make the game more even at the margin 

But then you'd get a situation where Rodri is left out of the last 2 games of the season because Man City can potentially play CL final, yet lose in semi final and it was all pointless.

Nothing needs to be done really; if you don't want to play 55-60 games, just sign up for a team not at the top. Or play is Saudi. Whatever. Or speak with your manager to leave you out of playing Everton. 

I understand it's demanding and hard and takes a toll. But it's literally like a neurosurgeon doing a 16 hour operation complaining about lack of rest. It sort of comes with the job. And noone makes you do it if you don't want to. 

[Mic09]

Or maybe a better example is a rock star complaining about doing another world tour and playing in a different city every night.

No one makes you record another album. You can call it a day anytime your contract expires.

Edited 9 hours ago by Mic09

[TreeVillan]

8 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

Or maybe a better example is a rock star complaining about doing another world tour and playing in a different city every night.

No one makes you record another album. You can call it a day anytime your contract expires.

Still free to complain about it. 

[JPJCB]

48 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

But then you'd get a situation where Rodri is left out of the last 2 games of the season because Man City can potentially play CL final, yet lose in semi final and it was all pointless.

Nothing needs to be done really; if you don't want to play 55-60 games, just sign up for a team not at the top. Or play is Saudi. Whatever. Or speak with your manager to leave you out of playing Everton. 

I understand it's demanding and hard and takes a toll. But it's literally like a neurosurgeon doing a 16 hour operation complaining about lack of rest. It sort of comes with the job. And noone makes you do it if you don't want to. 

I can’t see a problem with  this but maybe I’m missing something? The same situation could play out if you were worried about someone’s fitness 

I think it’s naive to expect players to deliberately limit their career aspirations due to this issue. This is a classic example of where individual clubs/players have incentives which are not conducive to the benefit of the system as a whole. These dynamics do exist in other fields and the solution is often to have a central authority fix the issue (e.g inflation arises cause everyone wants a pay rise but that ultimately ends up being bad for the economy cause it creates spiralling price increases. You fix it by having the government effectively fix the price of money in the economy.) 

And to your point about neurosurgeons, I’d say that’s a pretty good example of where a regulation dictating work hours would be a good thing? Otherwise you could get neurosurgeons working themselves to the ground to try and prove themselves in the role to the detriment of patients