That’s fair enough And again I keep saying I understand all that I just take a different slant on my feelings towards the matter I also keep asking what will be the reaction if say the Prem turn around and say yes you were guilty but our rules were a bit naff so we are only going to fine you £250 pound how will that make you guys feel about the whole matter Because right now anything is possible ?
And in your head were that to happen Would you accept that it’s all done with and that the outcome is fair ?
Much too vague a question. Depends on the circumstances. Have you accepted that Mason greenwood is innocent?
Weird thing to throw in but, no, I don’t think he is innocent but I will answer and imho I believe greed has got the better of someone. But I am not the one (not saying your are as I can’t remember) saying that rules is rules In fact where this all started was me saying that I don’t agree with the ffp rules and that the oil dopers should be allowed to just continue as all the bigger clubs have had their time in the sun and done nefarious things over history. I believe the rule is daft and City may not actually have broken the rule by the time this gets sorted. but if you ask me a question I will answer it to the best of my ability and how I see the situation at that point in time. something could happen next week and I might totally change my viewpoint or double down on what I am saying - I am quite flakey too lol I don’t hide behind saying too vague a question. The question is not vague your response is a side step. Which you are perfectly entitled to do. No one has to answer any question on here they don’t wish to. I just do Can literally ask me anything If I thought you lot would be in the slightest bit interested I would have created a thread called Ask Bumps …. Lmao but I know how that would go down lmao for a start I would need a thesaurus and a dictionary just to get through one of Saints questions lmao
I mean, it's basically what I'm expecting to happen. I'm sure more than £250, but City getting relegated, or having titles removed: that's not going to happen. City is too important to the PL. They steal top talent from other leagues and in part help make sure the PL is watched overseas by more people than La Liga, or Serie A. Premier League is not going to hurt their cash cow too bad. They'll do enough to make it look like they're not doing "nothing" and no more. I've always said FFP is toothless and causes more harm than good because it encourages cheating because it isn't enforced, if you play by the rules you're at a disadvantage. So, it not being enforced against City this time won't make me annoyed or angry.. I'll probably just say "tut tut tut" and carry on as normal because I think this whole investigation is more for show than effect.
It was vague because it depends how they’ve been found not guilty. They weren’t found innocent by uefa but got off on a technicality so pep has been saying they were innocent of charges. If the same happens because of the prem then no I won’t think they’re innocent. my points re greenwood was he hasn’t been found guilty but you’ve just said you don’t think he’s innocent? What difference is that to city being found not guilty on a technicality in that case? People will always have their opinions if they’ve broken rules no matter what the official outcome is, and if it’s not a clear and obvious 100% innocent then I think people are entitled to continue to think that - in same way people still think greenwood is a **** despite the fact he hasn’t been officially charged with anything as case was dropped. Not saying wrong to think either, but I don’t think you can if city get away with it, that everyone should forgive and forget admit they were wrong and hold City up on a pedastool? ps, don’t think there is a right or wrong answer to this either. Eveyone has their views, your views on ffp and how teams got richer is perfectly valid
I totally agree on a lot of that and we are not too far away from each others thoughts Its absolutely a show No coincidence that the Prem is battling having an external/independent authority being placed over governance and this happens lol
again lots I agree on in that I have also said on the Prem board I think that I find the Pep thing way more interesting than the City thing (I know this is another layer on lol) But I think Pep has realky backed himself into a corner here Not that it matters what I think - I just find some situations interesting. On his I believe he has gambled his future legendary status on backing City to the hilt. very similar to what Dalglish did with the Suarez affair. Not saying he destroyed his legacy but it was certainly hit
Its a good analogy. Once you step back from the club baiting stuff Dalglish certainly dirtied his bib with suarez. The whole club did. Guardiola is now 6 season into his man city career and is already judged an abject failure due to the fact he's failed to deliver the CL. he's had wholesale fraud to help him and still hasn't delivered. His words and antics paint him into the same picture as the other rampant man city stooges like Richards and kompany who are very obviously paid to comment a certain way only. 6 seasons..... 2 of them within the remit of these charges.
In order to make it more complex I actually think that whilst I don’t believe the rule is fair that the only action - IF found guilty on the majority of the charges can be to absolutely decimate city and make them the greatest club that never were As that’s the only way to show strength IMHO on this matter ie remove everything they have won Eradicate their achievements out history Have them pay every club in the pyramid a means tested fine and if that bankrupts them Tough They should also be sent to the lowest available tier in English football and I mean the lowest But that’s just how I think But if that did happen - it has to happen to every club that have issues of this magnitude Including us
the example in scotland of rangers is a fudge. rangers were caught out owing tax they couldn't pay but there overall debt lefts 134million unpiad. even so... and the massive damage these unpaid debts would do, they club was dissolved but all records transferred to a new club like nothing much happened and they were let into scottish league 2. or 3 depenidng how they are numbered. they had the cheek to apply for members of the prem again btw. if you pay enough when found guilty i'm sure they will be let keep their status. that's why I voted small fine I think they will be let off and ffp will be declared dead but in reality a few people will have gotten massive bribes.
The only thing that is making me wonder what will happen is this governance issue in the back ground they need a scalp And it needs to be big So it could all get interesting
all they need to is give city the nod that next season they'll have a transfer ban. boom 600mil spend in one window and all happy.
You say that city may not have broken 'the rule' and 'the rule is daft'. I'd like to know what is the rule you are referring to? As far as I'm aware they have been charged with 130 rule breaks involving multiple rules. When Der Spiegel first broke the story they published copies of many emails from a man city finance official to various people including one saying (paraphrasing) that a certain sponsorship deal for £90m would be financed by one of city's owners (I can't remember the official name) to the tune of £81m and the sponsor will only be required to pay man city £9m. This is just plain cheating and makes their submitted accounts in which this was hidden, fraudulent. FFP was brought in to stop clubs from overspending and going under. Even though FFP has been a joke in practice, spending what you earn and no more is a good idea. The bigger clubs who grew organically so have more income, spend more than the smaller clubs but every club has the opportunity to grow over time and earn more and spend more. The only alternative to that would be putting a universal cap on what clubs could spend whereby all clubs had the exact, same amount of money that they could spend on transfers and.that would be ridiculous. What city are doing is spending, not what they're earned but what they've been gifted. It's rule breaking of the highest order. The game revolves around rules for a reason, fair competition. The finance rules are no different. If there were no rules it would just be a free for all on and off the pitch. City aren't playing with a natural advantage like say a basketball team that has a couple of 7 feet tall players. They have created something that gives them an unfair advantage. It's interesting to note that should they be expelled from the league, the EFL has no obligation to take them like they would a relegated team.
Not saying I disagree with all of this because I don’t but what I will say is that you and many others say it was fair and that all clubs have the opportunity to grow Imho they don’t So much goes into the possibility of the growth of a club One aspect is investment I go back to Leicester cheating in the Championship and no one batted an eyelid and they were found guilty I keep talking about levels A rural club cannot and will not ever be able to compete with a city club imho therefore it cannot be construed as fair So if an investor wants to gift a club I have no problem with that I do see everyone’s opinion Honestly I just don’t totally agree Sorry
You don't have to be sorry. It's your opinion and that's fine. Have to say that of all the people who would take this view, you would have been last on my list
smaller city/towns/ satellite towns? Oldham for example Blackburn Preston? I mean a city the size of Liverpool supporting 2 prem clubs is actually probably marginal Birmingham is far larger but doesn't support 2 for whatever reason. other fairly large urban areas don't have any Bristol for example have 2 clubs trying to get up but can't and city is same size as Liverpool.
Oldham is pretty big place? Blackburn and Preston are both towns/cities? Bristol is a city? Birmingham is a city? Not seeing the point here? Places that aren’t cities can’t compete? Based on what?
