Home Community Man City Financial fairplay

This topic contains 135 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by newbalance newbalance 1 day, 18 hours ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 136 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #40904 Score: 0

    Oz
    Participant
    36 pts

    Cmon 9 don’t just pick 1 part of my post out to suit you, conveniently leaving out where I said for whatever reason Chelsea have dropped off the pace. This is the sort of shit that annoyed me on TT, smart a’s on there picking little pieces out to suit their argument but leaving out stuff that didn’t suit them. I’d hate to see this site go down that path.
    As for banning city, dunno if that’s warranted, maybe a transfer ban, but that’d just see them loaded with extra money when the ban ends. Tough call to make, the only thing we can hope for is consistency but I wouldn’t swing by the plums waiting for that from those in charge.

    #40905 Score: 0

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    545 pts

    Oz, it was a light hearted response mate hence the smiley face. Certainly no offence intended.

    I understand the point you are making but Chelsea are miles behind both Liverpool and City now so that gap has been closed by Liverpool on Chelsea and Liverpool massively reduced the gap on City this season at the same time getting to a 2nd consecutive CL Final. Thems the facts mate whatever way we cut it.

    You’re right Chelsea have dropped off the pace,there are a number of reasons why and a transfer ban won’t help if that’s what finally materialises following the appeal process.

    It’s going to be a while before Chelsea are challenging for League titles again imo.

    Liverpool still remain a bit short in squad depth and lack a bit of creativity in midfield and may be an out and out striker but that won’t take too much to put right

    The future is bright for Liverpool under Klopp going forwards he is one of the Super Managers.

    #40913 Score: 0
    threeps
    threeps
    Participant
    29 pts

    “Well there we go. Are you Platini in disguise?

    Not entirely following what you mean? Or the rest of your post to be honest, you seem to be suggesting that all is not right with FFP and that is a point I already made. Too little, too late, and easily bypassed it seems.

    Think I will drop out of this thread, seems Nine get’s easily upset with my comments.

    #40914 Score: 0

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    545 pts

    I was just setting the record straight threeps best we all get back to what this thread was intended for and the question posed.

    #40915 Score: 0

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    545 pts

    Oz, always enjoy reading and sharing posts with you buddie.

    #40908 Score: 0

    Oz
    Participant
    36 pts

    Apologies mate, thought you were taking the P, certainly don’t put you int the category of some on TT. I do believe Liverpool have closed the gap but city only have to buy a couple of players & they’ll stay ahead regardless of what we do.
    The best thing both us & city have going for us is stability in all areas, in particular manager. Whilst we can’t match them financially we are a well run business & indeed are heading in the right direction under Klopp. Unfortunately we are the best we’ve been for the best part of 2 decades in the same era as the most expensive squad in history. Ah well still got the C/L to look forward to.

    #40923 Score: 0
    newbalance
    newbalance
    Participant
    110 pts

    Don’t even understand the Platini remarks – what does that even mean?

    Chelsea and Manchester used to cite as examples I would presume rather than having a dig at and people instantly get defensive.

    At least 3ps was trying to offer some sort of a solution. I alluded to something yesterday that I personally wouldn’t be the best person in this type of discussion as such as it’d be hypocritical given our current spending power (although done fairly might I add).

    In essence if I may use this analogy, a Remainer trying to deliver Brexit!

    #40936 Score: 0

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    545 pts

    Nil, Chelsea have always complied completely with FFP since it was introduced and have never once been queried by UEFA.

    History is history we can only deal with the present my personal view is that limiting Clubs to a 100m net spend would simplify everything that was the FFP 2 proposal which seems to have gone quiet.

    The question posed and the theme at the very start of this thread though was would it be right to ban City from the CL if they are found not to have complied with FFP. Unfortunately we strayed a long where from there which past experiences tells us often happens with FFP debates.

    #40938 Score: 0
    newbalance
    newbalance
    Participant
    110 pts

    Nine, I’ll take my involvement out in any of the other stuff already on here and to answer the question, Yes if ‘A’ Team under investigation has breached FFP Rules/Guidelines. An appeal can be allowed and should that take place, this is naturally met with a final decision.

    #40942 Score: 0

    Oz
    Participant
    36 pts

    Limiting spending sounds like a good idea in theory, would certainly level the playing field but I doubt it’ll ever happen, there’s way too much money involved & you can see the restrictions in trade argument from different countries coming up.

    #40943 Score: 1

    nine nine nine
    Moderator
    545 pts

    Nil, wouldn’t disagree with any of that mate.

    Let’s see how things develop if City are charged and found guilty they will have an opportunity to appeal that decision to UEFA and then take it to CAS so plenty of water to flow under the bridge yet and any ban would be unlikely to be applicable to the forthcoming season because of that.

    newbalance
    #40944 Score: 1

    Mikus
    Participant
    97 pts

    The seeds for all this were sown long ago when clubs became businesses. And in the advent of the premier league in the early 90s with Sky pumping vast quantities of cash into the game, the legacy it has left us with today is not really a surprising one in terms of making clubs more powerful. So really debates about fines and bans are neither here nor there. This is what modern football is and it’s here to stay until it no longer becomes sustainable. As I’ve mentioned before on here, the blueprint for all this seems to have been from the New York Cosmos in the US in the 70s when they splashed huge amounts of cash on players like Pele to take the game off over there. And it was briefly successful…until the TV networks pulled the plug and that was that. But in Europe the TV revenues have made all this sustainable (and profitable). So it grows and grows. To what end? Whilst a super league seems increasingly inevitable, I’m not quite as sure. I think the domestic fans still have a big influence on the direction of the game and if they went on strike, things would quickly disintegrate. As an alternative then, and going back to the US analogy, I do wonder whether to increase the excitement they may eventually dispense with the result of a draw, and instead at the end of the game you would have a “run up, dribbling” version of penalties from 25 yards out to force a result, and so maximise the entertainment value. Winner takes all. That seems to be the mentality now.

    newbalance
    #41011 Score: 0
    newbalance
    newbalance
    Participant
    110 pts

    Didn’t want to start a new thread, but this Breaking News in:

    Headline: Man City referred to Uefa financial body

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48292248

    #41023 Score: 1
    maverick1973
    maverick1973
    Participant
    336 pts

    Nil-They should make a mistake” lost in tranlations and punish -MANCHESTER UNITED instead.

    newbalance
    #41068 Score: 0

    Tugay is God
    Participant

    Nil, Danilo is not better defensively than Stones and Mahrez has not made 4 appearances this season. He has made 42 appearances scoring 11 goals. Don’t let a little thing like facts get in the way of your argument eh.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 136 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.