Football Leaks: UEFA Investigation into Manchester City

Jurgen The German

Morzadec wrote: »

TLDR: How big of a domestic Goliath do City have to become before we all start cheering for David, even if David is our biggest historic rival?

Its cyclical. Whenever Pep leaves the mammoth accumulation of points will imo cease. A new manager will come in and wont get the same from the players. Same as Klopp at LFC. There is no way in hell any other manager gets near the 97 points lfc reached this year with that group of players. City are playing with loaded dice, only the most naive of folk could say other wise but the fact is they are an Instagram generation team. Flashy, pretty but ultimately vacuous and hollow. The likes of United or Lfc have a global reach that city can only dream of having and if klopp can outlast Pep at city then there is no doubt in my mind that there are a couple of league titles in lfcs near future.

I genuinely believe that we will not see city reach the level of recognition that United and Lfc have in the next 30 years at least. The managers before pep struggled to motivate the team despite all the money and the managers after him will do exactly the same.

ozzy jr

The mad thing is, there's not one city fan questioning the owners or the finances. If you read these threads, anything on social media, none of them have anything to say other than defending what's going on. It's sad in a way really.

Other clubs who have had ****e owners have always had some level of dissent, United fans protested about their owners, Liverpool the same with their first lot of Americans, Arsenal with what went on there. I even know a couple of Chelsea fans who weren't arsed with the success the Russian brought. The list goes on, Blackpool, Portsmouth, etc.

City? All they really want is to get one over on United, no matter what.

SlickRic

ozzy jr wrote: »

The mad thing is, there's not one city fan questioning the owners or the finances. If you read these threads, anything on social media, none of them have anything to say other than defending what's going on. It's sad in a way really.

Other clubs who have had ****e owners have always had some level of dissent, United fans protested about their owners, Liverpool the same with their first lot of Americans, Arsenal with what went on there. I even know a couple of Chelsea fans who weren't arsed with the success the Russian brought. The list goes on, Blackpool, Portsmouth, etc.

City? All they really want is to get one over on United, no matter what.

no, i totally understand it.

the only way City were ever going to compete was for what happened to happen - for a bottomless pit of money to come in and turn them into this machine. as a City fan, you will have seen the depths of them reaching League 1, and if you're that low, you will do anything to see success. i would assume you don't really care where the money is from, because it doesn't affect you directly - you just get to see a fúcking amazing team with one of the greatest managers ever destroy all before them, and you get to see trophy after trophy. it's paradise. and you're not hurting anyone personally. you just get the spoils of supporting a better team than your mates.

what does it matter to you as a City fan how the money got there? all that matters is that your team is winning. you also tell yourself that your success was needed to break up the evil status quo. you want the fantasy to continue; of course you do. it's perfectly natural. i'm not even going to pretend that if I was a fan of the club that I wouldn't react the exact same way. i haven't been through what their fans have been through - being in the doldrums (proper doldrums, not just Liverpool in the 90s levels) and watched the other Manchester club win everything. i'd say you'd have given your left bollock and considered selling your soul to Satan for success, and to hell with the morals of it.

it's all perfectly natural for a City fan to try to ignore it or defend it. it's tribalism at its most logical. but that doesn't mean everyone else has to ignore it.

and of course this story is going to get the most coverage and reaction right now. City have just destroyed the domestic season, a culmination of the 11 years of planning and investment. it's the biggest league in the world, and nobody gives a bollocks about Bolton Wanderers. this is the perfect time to take stock; never mind the fact this story had gotten legs again last week before the FA Cup final even happened.

ozzy jr

SlickRic wrote: »

what does it matter to you as a City fan how the money got there? all that matters is that your team is winning.

Nah, I wouldn't be comfortable if the team I supported was being bank rolled by a human rights abusing nation. I wouldn't set foot inside the stadium to be honest.

Backstreet Moyes

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Wonder how long until pep gets bored . He must know city don’t compare to Barca and Bayern in terms of history and support but maybe he don’t care. Will he be around as long as Fergie and Wenger?

Nailed on for Juve whenever he leaves City probably in a year or two

eagle eye

ozzy jr wrote:

The mad thing is, there's not one city fan questioning the owners or the finances. If you read these threads, anything on social media, none of them have anything to say other than defending what's going on. It's sad in a way really.

Why is it sad? They are fans of a club that it too long ago was plying it's trade in league 1. They are now watching a club that has won four league titles in eight years, they have Pep Guardiola, David 'Merlin' Silva, Sergio Aguero, Kevin DeBruyne and many more world class players at their club. It's a great time to be a City fan, especially for all those who suffered the relegations.

ozzy jr

eagle eye wrote: »

Why is it sad?

Because people are turning a blind eye to the human rights abuses that the owners are partaking in, because their football team is winning. I thought that would be obvious.

eagle eye

ozzy jr wrote:

Because people are turning a blind eye to the human rights abuses that the owners are partaking in, because their football team is winning. I thought that would be obvious.

Football fans really don't care about anything outside of how their team is performing.
I'm sure if they were not performing well that they would care.
If we start going down the path of caring about the lives of owners of football clubs where do we stop? Do we go after anybody with a relationship with somebody controversial? Do we go after tax cheats?
Just wondering where you draw the line?

ozzy jr

eagle eye wrote: »

Football fans really don't care about anything outside of how their team is performing.

That's not true. Some do, some don't.

eagle eye wrote: »

If we start going down the path of caring about the lives of owners of football clubs where do we stop? Do we go after anybody with a relationship with somebody controversial? Do we go after tax cheats?
Just wondering where you draw the line?

You're talking absolute ****e there.

Mitch Connor

ozzy jr wrote: »

Because people are turning a blind eye to the human rights abuses that the owners are partaking in, because their football team is winning. I thought that would be obvious.

And the winning football team is worth the money they've paid for exactly this reason : they are buying the silence of the press and the public because any criticism of them is seen in a tribalistic light. Same reason the money went in to bein sports and psg (Qatar owners obvs). Its buying power over press and public to sports wash their humanitarian crimes.

People who want to shut down questions and criticisms of the city owners have been bought off by pretty football. The exact reason they've spent the money.

~Rebel~

eagle eye wrote: »

Football fans really don't care about anything outside of how their team is performing.
I'm sure if they were not performing well that they would care.
If we start going down the path of caring about the lives of owners of football clubs where do we stop? Do we go after anybody with a relationship with somebody controversial? Do we go after tax cheats?
Just wondering where you draw the line?

I know what you mean - but it's hard to factor genocide in with other crimes... in fairness, these lads are in a league of their own.

I'm also never really a fan of "football fans" behaviour as a blanket term. I think plenty of big football fans are very interested in things beyond just on-field performance. I'm sure we all know people who have sort of 'drifted away' from watching the elite level as they just don't feel any connection to what's going on anymore, and I'm sure we also all know people who rabidly follow anything their club says or does. And then there are plenty in between. And I'd be confident there are plenty of City fans not terribly happy about the way the club is going - they're just also the least likely people to get involved in flame wars on social media. A big part comes down to age. I expect irrational allegiance from younger people, I expect more critical intelligent thought from older people.

.G.

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Wonder how long until pep gets bored . He must know city don’t compare to Barca and Bayern in terms of history and support but maybe he don’t care. Will he be around as long as Fergie and Wenger?

He seemed pretty fed up that City's title win wasn't big news for long if at all last week, he was very cheesed off at Rob Harris question too. If that sort of stuff carries on he'll soon get cheesed off and head elsewhere for the acclaim success with a bigger club with less murky finances will bring.

TFBubendorfer

Mitch Connor wrote: »

And the winning football team is worth the money they've paid for exactly this reason : they are buying the silence of the press and the public because any criticism of them is seen in a tribalistic light.

You've got that completely arse-way round. That statement could not possibly more wrong.

If Abu Dhabi's reason to buy Man City was to buy the silence of the press it has backfired quite spectacularly. In reality, a war fought far away that has no direct implication on the West would barely ever be mentioned in the press, just like all the African conflicts that are still going on to this day get virtually no coverage.

It's entirely down to the high profile that their involvement in football has given them that all of a sudden Yemen is being mentioned. You never know, this could eventually actually have a real effect at some point, all down to the public eye suddenly turned towards that conflict zone.

Mitch Connor

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

You've got that completely arse-way round. That statement could not possibly more wrong.

If Abu Dhabi's reason to buy Man City was to buy the silence of the press it has backfired quite spectacularly. In reality, a war fought far away that has no direct implication on the West would barely ever be mentioned in the press, just like all the African conflicts that are still going on to this day get virtually no coverage.

It's entirely down to the high profile that their involvement in football has given them that all of a sudden Yemen is being mentioned. You never know, this could eventually actually have a real effect at some point, all down to the public eye suddenly turned towards that conflict zone.

Nope. 100% disagree. Same reason Saudi have an interest in buying United. Pr on a global, huge, scale.

You think they are looking to lose billions cause they grew up wanting to turn city into a super power?

Rayne Wooney

If they go after City surely they need to go after Chelsea too no?

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

If we start going down the path of caring about the lives of owners of football clubs where do we stop? Do we go after anybody with a relationship with somebody controversial? Do we go after tax cheats?
Just wondering where you draw the line?

I think tax cheats should be prosecuted and genocidal regimes should be ostracised by the international community and where possible face the most serious sanctions.

Is there some confusion about "the line"?

LuckyLloyd

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

If they go after City surely they need to go after Chelsea too no?

Chelsea have a pending transfer ban. They have not been ignored.

~Rebel~

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Chelsea have a pending transfer ban. They have not been ignored.

Have been in hot water a bunch of times over the years too... only avoided a ban 8 or 9 years ago after they paid off Lens to drop the case against them. And were being investigated a few years ago too, around the same time as the Barca ban.

hetuzozaho

SlickRic wrote: »

and that's why everyone forgot that they won the Premier League the day after they won it.

Where are you based? The city fans around me seemed delighted...

Bit of a carnival down the local actually

larchielads

Why is nobody questioning the players here? Everyones bangin on about the fans and how dare they support the arab lot with their dirty money. But yet its ok for the players to line their pockets with the dirty money???

dmigsy

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Mitch Connor wrote: »

And the winning football team is worth the money they've paid for exactly this reason : they are buying the silence of the press and the public because any criticism of them is seen in a tribalistic light.

You've got that completely arse-way round. That statement could not possibly more wrong.

If Abu Dhabi's reason to buy Man City was to buy the silence of the press it has backfired quite spectacularly. In reality, a war fought far away that has no direct implication on the West would barely ever be mentioned in the press, just like all the African conflicts that are still going on to this day get virtually no coverage.

It's entirely down to the high profile that their involvement in football has given them that all of a sudden Yemen is being mentioned. You never know, this could eventually actually have a real effect at some point, all down to the public eye suddenly turned towards that conflict zone.

Do yourself a favour and Google "sportswashing".

This article from last year outlines amnesty internationals view on the reasons behind City's spending.
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/nov/11/manchester-city-owners-accused-sportswashing-gulf-image

dmigsy

larchielads wrote: »

Why is nobody questioning the players here? Everyones bangin on about the fans and how dare they support the arab lot with their dirty money. But yet its ok for the players to line their pockets with the dirty money???

This is actual whataboutery but I'll bite.

No-one has said it's ok that the players are happy to take the money. I think most people have long considered players to be mercenary so it's fairly unsurprising to most that they will take the biggest paycheck available along with the quality sporting setup on offer at City.

What do you think about the main topic of the thread?

riemann

larchielads wrote: »

Why is nobody questioning the players here? Everyones bangin on about the fans and how dare they support the arab lot with their dirty money. But yet its ok for the players to line their pockets with the dirty money???

Agreed, Vincent Holier than thou Kompany, had no problem serving what is the PR department of a nasty little regime.

We all know by now he is well educated so he can't plead ignorance on this one.

eagle eye

I wonder how many people would be posting here if we eliminated all fans of top six clubs.
I don't support a Premier league club. Anyone else?

eagle eye

riemann wrote:

Agreed, Vincent Holier than thou Kompany, had no problem serving what is the PR department of a nasty little regime.

Kompany got there before the change in ownership, only just but he was there before them.

hetuzozaho

And Liverpool didn't mind taking CIty's oil money when it suited them

noodler

eagle eye wrote: »

I wonder how many people would be posting here if we eliminated all fans of top six clubs.
I don't support a Premier league club. Anyone else?

What is your agenda?

LuckyLloyd

hetuzozaho wrote: »

And Liverpool didn't mind taking CIty's oil money when it suited them

What does that even mean?

Have to say, it’s a real bad look for those trying to deflect from the issues raised here. Smacks of the adults trying to have a conversation while the spoiled teenagers shout ‘boring’ and stick their hands over their ears.

We’re talking about deliberate false accounting and fraud at minimum; hiding money that has blood all over it. If your riposte to that is ‘you’re just bitter we beat you’ it comes across as juvenile in the extreme.

citytillidie

noodler wrote: »

What is your agenda?

Well he does support the original team who bought the Premier League but then the owner could not sustain it now and mid table in the Championship after getting promotion from League 1

citytillidie

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

What does that even mean?

Have to say, it’s a real bad look for those trying to deflect from the issues raised here. Smacks of the adults trying to have a conversation while the spoiled teenagers shout ‘boring’ and stick their hands over their ears.

We’re talking about deliberate false accounting and fraud at minimum; hiding money that has blood all over it. If your riposte to that is ‘you’re just bitter we beat you’ it comes across as juvenile in the extreme.

He is talking about Sterling forcing his move to Man City I am guessing

LuckyLloyd

citytillidie wrote: »

He is talking about Sterling forcing his move to Man City I am guessing

My question stands: what relevance does that hold here?

TitianGerm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

What does that even mean?

Have to say, it’s a real bad look for those trying to deflect from the issues raised here. Smacks of the adults trying to have a conversation while the spoiled teenagers shout ‘boring’ and stick their hands over their ears.

We’re talking about deliberate false accounting and fraud at minimum; hiding money that has blood all over it. If your riposte to that is ‘you’re just bitter we beat you’ it comes across as juvenile in the extreme.

I'd say he's on about the Sterling transfer.

hetuzozaho

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

We’re talking about deliberate false accounting and fraud at minimum; hiding money that has blood all over it. If your riposte to that is ‘you’re just bitter we beat you’ it comes across as juvenile in the extreme.

Ah look I agree with you that this money is bad money. And it should be stopped. 100%.

And maybe this investigation will help that but IMO the football clubs we support don't feel the same way, as they will all take the bloody money. It's disheartening but maybe I need to turn off the Premier League altogether.

Fitz*

From what I remember, Liverpool did not want to sell Sterling at all. He forced through the move, using both the media and his agent. Liverpool offered an increased contract to him, but he rejected it.

How were Liverpool happy to take City's oil money in that scenario?

Fitz*

Anyways, I really do hope that there is concrete evidence that comes out against City. If they are properly cooking the books, which it looks like they are, then it has to be brought up and they have to be punished for it.

Would I like City stripped of their titles and awarded to 2nd place each time? Probably not tbh. Would I like City banned from making transfers and points deductions in the next seasons directly. Probably yes.

A CL ban won't do anything to them, only help their PL campaign. Players being paid as much as City's players are will take the 1 year hit.

Mitch Connor

FitzShane wrote: »

Anyways, I really do hope that there is concrete evidence that comes out against City. If they are properly cooking the books, which it looks like they are, then it has to be brought up and they have to be punished for it.

Would I like City stripped of their titles and awarded to 2nd place each time? Probably not tbh. Would I like City banned from making transfers and points deductions in the next seasons directly. Probably yes.

A CL ban won't do anything to them, only help their PL campaign. Players being paid as much as City's players are will take the 1 year hit.

If City have been paying the players by other means, I wonder what that could mean for the players from a tax perspective - could the players themselves be in serious trouble, or are their taxes declared fine, its just the ultimate source of that money that is the problem? hmmmm.

hetuzozaho

FitzShane wrote: »

How were Liverpool happy to take City's oil money in that scenario?

Ha well maybe they weren't happy Sterling was leaving.

I just mean clubs take oil money into their accounts knowing its unethical.
The Neymar transfer spread a lot of Qatari money around the footballing world too.

As said by other posters, it's not right and needs to stop.

Fitz*

hetuzozaho wrote: »

Ha well maybe they weren't happy Sterling was leaving.

I just mean clubs take oil money into their accounts knowing its unethical.
The Neymar transfer spread a lot of Qatari money around the footballing world too.

As said by other posters, it's not right and needs to stop.

Money has been spread around for decades.

Were you equally angry when Chelsea spent their oil money on Damien Duff? Or did you say then that Blackburn were happy to take the oil money then, even though they knew it was unethical?

irelandrover

FitzShane wrote: »

Money has been spread around for decades.

Were you equally angry when Chelsea spent their oil money on Damien Duff? Or did you say then that Blackburn were happy to take the oil money then, even though they knew it was unethical?

As a Blackburn fan i was very angry when they spent their oil money on Duff. Mainly because they bought Duff.

hetuzozaho

FitzShane wrote: »

Money has been spread around for decades.

Were you equally angry when Chelsea spent their oil money on Damien Duff? Or did you say then that Blackburn were happy to take the oil money then, even though they knew it was unethical?

ha I'm not sure it makes me angry, I'm fairly easy going guy I think

I would say the same about all clubs taking this oil money. It's unethical. I think we all agree though?

Fitz*

Mitch Connor wrote: »

If City have been paying the players by other means, I wonder what that could mean for the players from a tax perspective - could the players themselves be in serious trouble, or are their taxes declared fine, its just the ultimate source of that money that is the problem? hmmmm.

I would assume that they are paying taxes ok, or somewhere anyways? It's bonuses that they are receiving from different sponsors. That seems ok from the outside and they are probably paying tax on this bonus income. The issue is that these 'bonuses' are paid for winning trophies, but they receive the 'bonus' even if they do not win the trophy.

Wonder if the City players being paid a bonus for winning the CL this season? They could be.

kippy

Look,
Paying people thousands of pounds a week to kick a ball into a net for entertainment while half the planet live in abject poverty is unethical on all and every level.
Gouging fans of initially groups of workers/community players for three jerseys a year that cost pennies to produce in asia is unethical on multiple levels.
People like us, supporting low paid work in asia is unethical etc etc

The source of the money for same doesn't really matter.

Then you're down the what is more "unethical" argument.

The whole thing is disgusting if you ask me (top level professional football) and while there are "more bad" people involved the whole thing is ultimately a major business with massive money involved. The fans are but the customer and very far removed from where fans of top clubs were decades ago.
The player on the pitch has zero emotional ties with the area/club and the wages they are on make them far removed from the fans.
Football at the grassroots level is joyus and supported by the goodwill of many - kids playing football is great to see - but at some point up the chain it gets disjointed from reality.

#grumpyoldmanrantover

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

I wonder how many people would be posting here if we eliminated all fans of top six clubs.
I don't support a Premier league club. Anyone else?

Me.

TBH, I kinda like City, always the underdogs overshadowed by the rich successful neighbour, a loyal fan base (I know some say just not a very big one) that turned out in huge numbers when they were in the third tier. The first game I went to in England was at the old Maine Road.

It's just the accusations, they're not good at all. The FFP one is less troubling, in the sense that there are rules, if they are broken I wouldn't get too wound up, presume a CL suspension is in order as has happened to other clubs.

But the links with a family accused of serious war crimes in Yemen, of pushing a country to the brink of what has been described as one of the worst humanitarian crises in the past 100 years, a regime that endorses stoning and flogging and rape as punishment. It's far more vague, unlike the FFP issue...but it's far more troubling...

Benzino

FitzShane wrote: »

Anyways, I really do hope that there is concrete evidence that comes out against City. If they are properly cooking the books, which it looks like they are, then it has to be brought up and they have to be punished for it.

Would I like City stripped of their titles and awarded to 2nd place each time? Probably not tbh. Would I like City banned from making transfers and points deductions in the next seasons directly. Probably yes.

A CL ban won't do anything to them, only help their PL campaign. Players being paid as much as City's players are will take the 1 year hit.

The investigation has nothing to do with the PL I don't think., they haven't broken any FA/PL rules from my understanding so they shouldn't be docked points next season if found guilty.

Mitch Connor

Benzino wrote: »

The investigation has nothing to do with the PL I don't think., they haven't broken any FA/PL rules from my understanding so they shouldn't be docked points next season if found guilty.

A PL investigation for the same basic reasons is apparently also either ongoing or will go into effect following the Uefa investigation and ruling.

The Uefa ruling will have no direct PL impact though.

IncognitoMan

Mitch Connor wrote: »

A PL investigation for the same basic reasons is apparently also either ongoing or will go into effect following the Uefa investigation and ruling.

The Uefa ruling will have no direct PL impact though.

I feel like this is a make it break move for the likes of ffp. This is about as clear a case as they ever will see so if they don't act now then they never will.

eagle eye

citytillidie wrote:

Well he does support the original team who bought the Premier League but then the owner could not sustain it now and mid table in the Championship after getting promotion from League 1

Yeah Blackburn lifelong fan Jack Walker put his money into the club and we won the Premier league. He didn't leave the club with debts though.

eagle eye

noodler wrote:

What is your agenda?

I don't have one, I'm just reacting to the ott posts here and realising that most, if not all, are coming from fans of City's rival clubs.

ozzy jr

eagle eye wrote: »

I wonder how many people would be posting here if we eliminated all fans of top six clubs.
I don't support a Premier league club. Anyone else?

Yeah, I don't support a PL, English or British club. What difference does it make? Does it mean my view is more or less important than someone who does support a PL club?

ozzy jr

FitzShane wrote: »

Wonder if the City players being paid a bonus for winning the CL this season? They could be.

They got a bonus for winning the FA Cup a few years ago, even though they were beaten in the Final