Pep Guardiola’s Manchester City continue to attract controversy off the pitch for their behind-the-scenes financial dealings, with the club accused by some of unfairly sidestepping financial fair play.
The manager insisted that his side deserved to be at the peak of English football, telling reporters in his pre-match presser that the Cityzens had stuck to the financial rules in place.
Given that FFP has been acknowledged to lack much in the way of teeth when it comes to penalising clubs, one might be inclined to question whether a stricter reading of the rules would yield a different outcome for the league leaders.
You can catch the clip below, courtesy of BBC Sport and @ManchesterisB:
“We deserve this success now like they had decades ago”
I’m sorry, but Bill Shankly didn’t drag this club from the 2nd division to have his legacy used as a justification for sportswashing and financial doping. Enjoy your success now, but don’t act like it’s the same as ours. https://t.co/U95jKd5Vdk
— Bay Area Red 💍💍💍💍 (@LFCCurry) February 14, 2022
It’s still baffling that owners who invest in football are still attacked, whilst those who suck money from the game are held up as heroes. Ridiculous in fact. Also you’d think the fact that City’s owners put in some money a decade ago would’ve worn off by now – but keep clutching at those imaginary straws.
The only reason they weren’t banned was UEFA waited for more than 5 years to bring charges against them, not because they didn’t financially dope, they did. They were facing a two year ban from European competition, huge fines and potential expulsion from the Premier League. They have to be congratulated for successfully being able to dodge the rules and purchase trophies allowing them to sportswash an extremist Middle Eastern regime. Simple fact is they stuck a pin into Man City, it could just as easily been Huddersfield, Bradford or Bolton.
Absolute garbage. I am sick and tired of ridiculous comments.
Look at Manchester City’s audited accounts and you will find they clearly comply with financial regulations and FFP.
Anyone out there who can show any evidence whatsoever that they broke FFPsince Pep came.? No you can’t cause there isn’t any.
No more innuendos opinions and downright lies.
If you can’t provide EVIDENCE nobody will take you seriously.
You just cannot accept that City are the best run club in the world and found NOT GUILTY of breaching FFP.
Oh for god’s sake change the bloody record. Liverpool, United et al always had more money to spend than the likes of city, West ham etc. etc. Continually moaning about man city’s wealth is pathetic and belittling. City are the best run club in Europe at the moment as all the records show, anyone that says different has no idea. Time for Klopp, Kipp and co. to for God sakess stop whining and do something about trying to beat them
Two things can be correct at the same time.
The club has cheated with fake sponsorships adding huge revenues to the team that has led to their being able to stack the deck and shame on the sport for allowing such things.
They are also a really well run organization that recruits great players with great attitudes and a great coach who is very good at man management plus the Klopp like approach to acquiring players who fit perfectly into the coaches tactics.
“The club has cheated with fake sponsorships adding huge revenues to the team that has led to their being able to stack the deck and shame on the sport for allowing such things”
Where is the evidence? Fake news at it’s ‘chip on shoulder’ worst.
I think I made a distinction between club ownership and the team themselves. If I had a chip on my shoulder I would likely have not taken the time to balance my positive comments on the team and their support system.
Bay Area Red says “I’m sorry, but Bill Shankly didn’t drag this club from the 2nd division to have his legacy used as a justification for sportswashing and financial doping.”
I get a little tired at reading that everything Liverpool do is good and everything City do is bad. The constant use of term sportswashing and financial doping with no evidence to back it up no proof of any wrong doing.
It reminds me of Animal Farm “Four legs good two legs bad”
“Liverpool good City bad.” No evidence just a mantra. An often repeated mantra.
Let’s put the record straight. The biggest single event that confirmed the importance of large amounts of money in football was the starting of the Premier League.
By isolating the top league, the huge amounts of money coming from the TV right could be kept and shared among Premier League clubs and not shared with the three other leagues.
By allowing The Premier League to negotiate for itself it gave the Premier League clubs the opportunity to accrue monies from UK TV rights, worldwide TV rights, European competitions and Sponsorship, ticket sales and shirts sales etc. Not to mention that Chairman/Owners themselves could profit very nicely thank you very much.
The setting up of the Premier League was led by the “big five clubs” Namely Manchester Utd., Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton and Tottenham.
“Of the original “Big Five”, Martin Edwards made £94m from his directorships and sale of shares in Manchester United, David Moores £90m selling his inherited Liverpool stake to Tom Hicks and George Gillett, David Dein £75m selling the Arsenal stake he bought cheaply in the 1980s to Alisher Usmanov. “(a)
So those 5 clubs are those that are most responsible for widening the gulf between the “have” and the “have nots.”
The changes to the structure of the league’s organisation had made it attractive to foreign investors. So now that is mainly who we have owning Premier League clubs.
Within a few years of the Premier League being set up the “Big Four” had emerged. Namely Man Utd, Arsenal Chelsea and Liverpool.” During the late nineties and 2000’s these four teams dominated the top four positions of the league. Thriving on money from TV right and Champions League participation. They had become the “haves” and the rest of the league the “have nots.” And the gap between the haves and the have nots was getting larger.
Only two teams have been able to close that gap, Chelsea with Abramovich’s money from 2003, (and no FFP) and Manchester City from Mansour’s money from 2008. Newcastle might be the third, but it will be harder for them due to FFP or whatever replaces it.
So money has become very important but not the only factor. We keep hearing that City have only done well because of their money. But in the last ten years United’s net spend on players has been greater than City’s which makes a nonsense of that claim. If just money was key United should be the dominant team. I think we all agree they are not.
It’s time people started giving City the credit for what they have achieved and stopped chanting mantras.
Where is your evidence of false accounting/sponsorship deals?