How did City get past this net of yours then? UEFA, the FA, the Premier League and, probably, FIFA, suck Man City's cock on a pretty much daily basis and have done **** all to prevent their flouting of FFP, so that pretty much kills your argument.
I guess the nuance's are too much for most people. Everton have committed the kind of petty fraud that most self employed people commit to avoid a bit of tax, what damned them badly was trying to pretend they'd lost 50% more matchday revenue than any other team. City's is more like a drug cartels money laundering operation, multiple shell companies and lawyers everywhere. Extremely complicated to unpick, and the only reason the FA have anything at all is thanks to football leaks. However, due to the way that evidence was collected I'm not sure how admissible any of that is. Knowing something and proving are not the same, and that's the problem with the city investigation. Hiring people to go through all the evidence is ****ing expensive. Same with the taxman, much easier to go after the little guy with faked receipts than the corporation with off-shore shell companies and an army of accountants and lawyers.
well considering the PL are just reusing the UEFA charges City were found guilty on it shouldn't be that expensive
Same way that PSG and Chelsea have done it ... there's rich and then there is very very rich ... and those in the latter bracket are better armed and equipped to deflect the authorities into pursuing easier targets ... clubs like mine, Forest and Everton aren't going to break into the elite group I alluded to ... Citeh, PSG and Chelsea on the other hand would now be very difficult to dislodge from it, given the bottomless coffers ... The most successful club side in history, Real Madrid, have achieved that success on the back of some of the worst financial management of any of the elite clubs - but historically have been bailed out whenever necessary by the Spanish government... The Glazers tenure at your club has seen a club built on debt, not their own money - hardly an ideal financial situation - otherwise why have the green & gold brigade been so vociferous during their tenure? Targeting the likes of Everton, Forest, my club and others for 'overspending' when they are all owned by individuals or groups that can easily afford it is hypocrisy - and anti-competitive - who came up with the FFP financial parameters in the first place? and why set them at the limits that they are? - brings me back to my original point ... If you really want FFP then bring in a rule that means every club has to be completely debt free and can only spend on players out of retained or distributable earnings - but that would **** the game up completely... so what we have now is an ill conceived half-cocked hotchpotch that simply guarantees that it is increasingly difficult for any new attendees to make their way up to the top table ... as Newcastle are finding out ...
Fact is if city were innocent of any wrongdoing they'd give up what the PL have asked for and what uefa asked for before that. Still they withhold it tho. Guilty af
We've hire this di Marco geezer and told him to go after bot the Premier League and the EFL .... he's been leading them a merry dance for years ... will piss myself if he ends up winning and having them pay US money instead of the other way around
To be quite frank, there's no point in me trying to explain the differences between the 2 cases more than I have, because you are a ******, as you keep proving.
Of what Sucksta? ... buying footballing success? How very dare they? ... never happened before Citeh got bankrolled eh?
Of cheating the rules they signed up for mate. Its not difficult to understand that's why they are under investigation for 115 charges of cheating. Not 115 charges of buying success
The bit that rarely gets mentioned in this conversation, players wagers and transfer fees. Good ole Jimmy Hill, his good intentions sort of backfired and assisted in creating the greed we have today..
