Manchester City Found Guilty Of Almost All Charges

[trooky]

9 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Apparently to be kicked out there needs to be a vote with 15 teams agreeing to boot them out .

 

 

 

I think this is what happened in Scotland to Rangers when they got demoted down the leagues .

Rangers went out of businesses and started as a new club which is why they were in League 2

[BenTheFox]

2 minutes ago, trooky said:

Rangers went out of businesses and started as a new club which is why they were in League 2

I feel like so many people can't get their heads around this. 

[Finnegan]

There's no such football club as Rangers. They're just a feature of Scottish football history, formed in 1872, went out of business in 2012.

 

Sevco FC is a new franchise club that bought their likeness for a cut price deal. Basically just the Ibrox Dons. Cosplaying as a historical giant.

 

 

[BenTheFox]

12 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

There's no such football club as Rangers. They're just a feature of Scottish football history, formed in 1872, went out of business in 2012.

 

Sevco FC is a new franchise club that bought their likeness for a cut price deal. Basically just the Ibrox Dons. Cosplaying as a historical giant.

 

 

The irony of them being wound up by HMRC isn't lost on me. 

[Finnegan]

I've got the Rest Is Football podcast on and, I'll admit I'm only a few minutes in listening to him have a bit of an emotional rant, so I don't know if he's going to be asked this by one of Shearer or Links (though I doubt it because they're all a bit nice to each other) but given what's come out, surely Micah Richards knew? Not all of it, that would be harsh, but surely he had some idea about the contracts and the off-the-books bonuses?

I mean, not only was he at the club during the window, but he was a long term player, he went through two contract negotiations (2011 and 2014) during the time frame and in particular during the second contract negotiation they didn't want him to leave and they were offering him quite a lot of money. So we think nobody talked to his agent about what extras they could slip his way?

 

And even if Richards himself wasn't offered anything, he was in around the squad, players talk to each other surely? And he's stayed closely linked to the club for years after? I have a hard time believing he's entirely ignorant and as shocked as he seems.

 

[Foxdiamond]

10 hours ago, LeePhilpottsBaldSpot said:

Who said on a par?

 

We broke FFP rules in 2013/14. Permitted overspend was £8m and we reported an overspend by £20m.

 

Might have been more if not for King Power sponsorship deals, and while the Vichai era was a million times more professional than his son's, I wouldn't be shocked if those deals helped cook the books in our favour.

Typical Leicester to look at self flagellation while the biggest case of fiddling concerning another club even after we have been punished and languish in the third tier

[Twitcher]

A couple of questions:-

 

Did we commit the same breach as City under psr, i.e. our ratio of income from the club wasn't enough to run the club in relation to outgoings, so the owner added income from his own pocket?

 

And, why with every other judgment, I can remrmber, the outcome and punishment were announced in tandem, but with City, it's just the outcome? Is it because in every other one, guilt was pleaded? I just think with how this has been done, it opens the door to X2 appeals; one for the outcome, and then another for the punishment. 

[AKCJ]

45 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

There's no such football club as Rangers. They're just a feature of Scottish football history, formed in 1872, went out of business in 2012.

 

Sevco FC is a new franchise club that bought their likeness for a cut price deal. Basically just the Ibrox Dons. Cosplaying as a historical giant.

 

 

Behave Finners.

 

Tell that to their supporters and ask what they think.

[Finnegan]

2 minutes ago, AKCJ said:

Behave Finners.

 

Tell that to their supporters and ask what they think.

 

Come on, man. Did I really need the fishing emoji?

 

[Number 6]

1 minute ago, Twitcher said:

A couple of questions:-

 

Did we commit the same breach as City under psr, i.e. our ratio of income from the club wasn't enough to run the club in relation to outgoings, so the owner added income from his own pocket?

 

And, why with every other judgment, I can remrmber, the outcome and punishment were announced in tandem, but with City, it's just the outcome? Is it because in every other one, guilt was pleaded? I just think with how this has been done, it opens the door to X2 appeals; one for the outcome, and then another for the punishment. 

I don't think any other club has breached in this way. This isn't spending more than your income allows under the rules, it's artificially inflating your income to meet the rules. It's accounting criminality.

 

There are two options now. Heavy punishment or remove PSR type rules. No other path exists.

[AKCJ]

Just now, Finnegan said:

 

Come on, man. Did I really need the fishing emoji?

There are plenty of dullards who peddle that nonsense.

[whoareyaaa]

11 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

I've got the Rest Is Football podcast on and, I'll admit I'm only a few minutes in listening to him have a bit of an emotional rant, so I don't know if he's going to be asked this by one of Shearer or Links (though I doubt it because they're all a bit nice to each other) but given what's come out, surely Micah Richards knew? Not all of it, that would be harsh, but surely he had some idea about the contracts and the off-the-books bonuses?

I mean, not only was he at the club during the window, but he was a long term player, he went through two contract negotiations (2011 and 2014) during the time frame and in particular during the second contract negotiation they didn't want him to leave and they were offering him quite a lot of money. So we think nobody talked to his agent about what extras they could slip his way?

 

And even if Richards himself wasn't offered anything, he was in around the squad, players talk to each other surely? And he's stayed closely linked to the club for years after? I have a hard time believing he's entirely ignorant and as shocked as he seems.

 

I have heard him mention before he couldn't believe the wages they was offering him and he of course took it like any one else would have done at the time.

[Foxdiamond]

4 hours ago, ozleicester said:

Every single trophy and record should read...
2011 FA Cup - Corrupt
2011-12 Premier League - Corrupt
 

 

5 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

You can rightly argue that FFP is a nonsense designed to stop exactly this for of investment to the benefit of those larger clubs, but once the rules were in place they were obliged to follow them.

Without wanting to defend Man City especially as their antics were not simply to compete in the Premier League but to obliterate all rivals. FFP is obviously nearly as bad because it protected the richer clubs and inhibits fair competition. Surely there is a fairer and better way to protect clubs from reckless owners but at the same time allows investment to challenge for honours etc

[Aus Fox]

For what it’s worth, here’s what I would do to avoid this being dragged out in courts for years to come.

For cheating Man City should have been disqualified from every cup competition in the seasons they broke the rules.

For this, I’d make them pay a set fee to every team that they played along the way, equivalent to the gate receipts a club would have received in the next round.

For each season they broke the rules, I’d implement a points deduction equivalent to what they would have received that season - then adjust the league tables accordingly - Man City would then compensate each team based on lost earning by finishing lower in the table.

Then a set fee for each team missing out on Champions League, Europa League, and Europa Conference.

This way fine money goes directly to the clubs impacted by the cheating.

Further to this, I would declare the owners not fit and proper to run a football club and force a sale.

For the non compliance I would give them an 80 point deduction this season and force their relegation to the championship. 

[em9999]

29 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

 

Without wanting to defend Man City especially as their antics were not simply to compete in the Premier League but to obliterate all rivals. FFP is obviously nearly as bad because it protected the richer clubs and inhibits fair competition. Surely there is a fairer and better way to protect clubs from reckless owners but at the same time allows investment to challenge for honours etc

There is no defending man city and its no defence for them to say the rules are unfair and we dont agree with them 

 

After being caught 

 

If they didn't like the rules bugger off and play somewhere else .. 

 

They have gained a unfair advantage already over teams that did play by the rules 

[em9999]

For instance if the law in England changed in terms what is legal

 

I wouldn't be then able to stand in court and say I dont agree with the new laws 

 

Man city have zero defence 

[Twitcher]

47 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

I don't think any other club has breached in this way. This isn't spending more than your income allows under the rules, it's artificially inflating your income to meet the rules. It's accounting criminality.

 

There are two options now. Heavy punishment or remove PSR type rules. No other path exists.

So you think the scale prevents the punishment being announced at the same time? I don't really see why the punishment couldn't have been announced.

[Chelmofox]

1 hour ago, Finnegan said:

I've got the Rest Is Football podcast on and, I'll admit I'm only a few minutes in listening to him have a bit of an emotional rant, so I don't know if he's going to be asked this by one of Shearer or Links (though I doubt it because they're all a bit nice to each other) but given what's come out, surely Micah Richards knew? Not all of it, that would be harsh, but surely he had some idea about the contracts and the off-the-books bonuses?

I mean, not only was he at the club during the window, but he was a long term player, he went through two contract negotiations (2011 and 2014) during the time frame and in particular during the second contract negotiation they didn't want him to leave and they were offering him quite a lot of money. So we think nobody talked to his agent about what extras they could slip his way?

 

And even if Richards himself wasn't offered anything, he was in around the squad, players talk to each other surely? And he's stayed closely linked to the club for years after? I have a hard time believing he's entirely ignorant and as shocked as he seems.

 

Richards himself said in an old interview that at 17 years old Man City offered him 100k a week on a 5 year deal. This was around 2005.

 

Always bugs me when these players are offered massive deals, that they dont stop to think about where that money might be coming from or who else takes their cut, especially as others around them are likely on competing wages.

Edited 6 hours ago by Chelmofox

[Number 6]

9 minutes ago, Twitcher said:

So you think the scale prevents the punishment being announced at the same time? I don't really see why the punishment couldn't have been announced.

I think it's probably just too complex to have been done within the same timeframe. Releasing the decision first allows the probable appeal process to occur in tandem with determining the appropriate punishment.

 

I think if it were going to be a modest points deduction then it would have happened. Things like expulsion, dropping them through the leagues, or retrospectively stripping trophies will take more deliberation.

[Chelmofox]

20 minutes ago, em9999 said:

There is no defending man city and its no defence for them to say the rules are unfair and we dont agree with them 

 

After being caught 

 

If they didn't like the rules bugger off and play somewhere else .. 

 

They have gained a unfair advantage already over teams that did play by the rules 

Back then, they were in a position to make huge noise about the problems with FFP rather than just cheat. Didn't they vote against it in the mid 2010's? Although by then they were cheating.

[Spudulike]

Hoping that we'll never have to watch the 'greatest Premier League moment' ever again. Agueeeeroooo. 

[Chelmofox]

1 hour ago, Number 6 said:

I don't think any other club has breached in this way. This isn't spending more than your income allows under the rules, it's artificially inflating your income to meet the rules. It's accounting criminality.

 

There are two options now. Heavy punishment or remove PSR type rules. No other path exists.

If they remove PSR rules then this has to be done retrospectively.  If thats done every club thats had to do anything to comply will have a case to ask the PL for compensation. This even goes to any club saying they had to sell a good player just to comply, or clubs who got themselves complete financially stuck as they couldn't even sell players at a book loss. This puts all liabilities on the PL and i cant see it happening.

[shen]

1 hour ago, Foxdiamond said:

Typical Leicester to look at self flagellation while the biggest case of fiddling concerning another club even after we have been punished and languish in the third tier

Things were flagged and highlighted way before we had the massive success we did. The fanbase at large didn't care that it came at the cost of other clubs. 
We can hardly get on the moral high horse and sue Man City for lost income/opportunity or point the finger when our club did the same during that very period. 
Just because Man City are probably the most egregious offender, doesn't mean there are many clubs in the top tiers that can honestly say they've not manipulated the FFP/PSR system.

[Number 6]

8 minutes ago, Chelmofox said:

If they remove PSR rules then this has to be done retrospectively.  If thats done every club thats had to do anything to comply will have a case to ask the PL for compensation. This even goes to any club saying they had to sell a good player just to comply, or clubs who got themselves complete financially stuck as they couldn't even sell players at a book loss. This puts all liabilities on the PL and i cant see it happening.

It would be very messy. I don't think the rules would actually be abolished, but if they hand out a weak punishment here then financial rules will just be flouted going forwards. It's why I do actually think we're going to see a hefty punishment in this case.

[davieG]

Manchester City transfer spending during era of financial rule breaking

2009-2018

 

 

The table shows that inthe calendar year of 2026, Fulham have the worst away form among the ever-present sides in the division. The Cottagers have just seven points from a possible 30.

Use the column header buttons to sort columns by ascending or descending orderCurrently not sorted

Season	Extra sponsorship amount paid by owners	Transfer money spent	Which significant players came in?
2009-10	£22.5m	£126m	Tevez, Adebayor, Lescott, Santa Cruz, Kolo Toure, Barry
2010-11	£28.5m	£157m	Dzeko, Yaya Toure, Balotelli, Silva, Kolarov, Milner
2011-12	£70.75m	£78m	Aguero, Nasri, Savic, Clichy
2012-13	£105.75m	£53m	Garcia, Nastasic, Rodwell, Sinclair, Maicon
2013-14	£111.5m	£99m	Fernandinho, Jovetic, Negredo, Navas
2014-15	£107.2m	£88m	Mangala, Bony, Fernando, Caballero
2015-16	£120.17m	£179m	De Bruyne, Sterling, Otamendi, Delph
2016-17	£129.59m	£185m	Stones, Sane, Jesus, Gundogan, Bravo, Nolito
2017-18	£134.73m	£272m	Laporte, Mendy, Walker, Bernardo, Ederson, Danilo
Total	£830.69m	£1.2bn

Source: Transfermarkt

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9lyk46gekkeo